Estimands for overall survival in clinical trials with treatment switching in oncology.

An addendum of the ICH E9 guideline on Statistical Principles for Clinical Trials was released in November 2019 introducing the estimand framework. This new framework aims to align trial objectives and statistical analyses by requiring a precise definition of the inferential quantity of interest, that is, the estimand. This definition explicitly accounts for intercurrent events, such as switching to new anticancer therapies for the analysis of overall survival (OS), the gold standard in oncology. Traditionally, OS in confirmatory studies is analyzed using the intention-to-treat (ITT) approach comparing treatment groups as they were initially randomized regardless of whether treatment switching occurred and regardless of any subsequent therapy (treatment-policy strategy). Regulatory authorities and other stakeholders often consider ITT results as most relevant. However, the respective estimand only yields a clinically meaningful comparison of two treatment arms if subsequent therapies are already approved and reflect clinical practice. We illustrate different scenarios where subsequent therapies are not yet approved drugs and thus do not reflect clinical practice. In such situations the hypothetical strategy could be more meaningful from patient's and prescriber's perspective. The cross-industry Oncology Estimand Working Group (www.oncoestimand.org) was initiated to foster a common understanding and consistent implementation of the estimand framework in oncology clinical trials. This paper summarizes the group's recommendations for appropriate estimands in the presence of treatment switching, one of the key intercurrent events in oncology clinical trials. We also discuss how different choices of estimands may impact study design, data collection, trial conduct, analysis, and interpretation.

Estimand framework: Are we asking the right questions? A case study in the solid tumor setting.

The estimand framework requires a precise definition of the clinical question of interest (the estimand) as different ways of accounting for "intercurrent" events post randomization may result in different scientific questions. The initiation of subsequent therapy is common in oncology clinical trials and is considered an intercurrent event if the start of such therapy occurs prior to a recurrence or progression event. Three possible ways to account for this intercurrent event in the analysis are to censor at initiation, consider recurrence or progression events (including death) that occur before and after the initiation of subsequent therapy, or consider the start of subsequent therapy as an event in and of itself. The new estimand framework clarifies that these analyses address different questions ("does the drug delay recurrence if no patient had received subsequent therapy?" vs "does the drug delay recurrence with or without subsequent therapy?" vs "does the drug delay recurrence or start of subsequent therapy?"). The framework facilitates discussions during clinical trial planning and design to ensure alignment between the key question of interest, the analysis, and interpretation. This article is a result of a cross-industry collaboration to connect the International Council for Harmonisation E9 addendum concepts to applications. Data from previously reported randomized phase 3 studies in the renal cell carcinoma setting are used to consider common intercurrent events in solid tumor studies, and to illustrate different scientific questions and the consequences of the estimand choice for study design, data collection, analysis, and interpretation.

Properties of the weighted log-rank test in the design of confirmatory studies with delayed effects.

Proportional hazards are a common assumption when designing confirmatory clinical trials in oncology. This assumption not only affects the analysis part but also the sample size calculation. The presence of delayed effects causes a change in the hazard ratio while the trial is ongoing since at the beginning we do not observe any difference between treatment arms, and after some unknown time point, the differences between treatment arms will start to appear. Hence, the proportional hazards assumption no longer holds, and both sample size calculation and analysis methods to be used should be reconsidered. The weighted log-rank test allows a weighting for early, middle, and late differences through the Fleming and Harrington class of weights and is proven to be more efficient when the proportional hazards assumption does not hold. The Fleming and Harrington class of weights, along with the estimated delay, can be incorporated into the sample size calculation in order to maintain the desired power once the treatment arm differences start to appear. In this article, we explore the impact of delayed effects in group sequential and adaptive group sequential designs and make an empirical evaluation in terms of power and type-I error rate of the of the weighted log-rank test in a simulated scenario with fixed values of the Fleming and Harrington class of weights. We also give some practical recommendations regarding which methodology should be used in the presence of delayed effects depending on certain characteristics of the trial.

Impact of mutational status on outcomes in myelofibrosis patients treated with ruxolitinib in the COMFORT-II study.

The JAK1/JAK2 inhibitor ruxolitinib produced significant reductions in splenomegaly and symptomatic burden and improved survival in patients with myelofibrosis (MF), irrespective of their JAK2 mutation status, in 2 phase III studies against placebo (COMFORT-I) and best available therapy (COMFORT-II). We performed a comprehensive mutation analysis to evaluate the impact of 14 MF-associated mutations on clinical outcomes in 166 patients included in COMFORT-II. We found that responses in splenomegaly and symptoms, as well as the risk of developing ruxolitinib-associated anemia and thrombocytopenia, occurred at similar frequencies across different mutation profiles. Ruxolitinib improved survival independent of mutation profile and reduced the risk of death in patients harboring a set of prognostically detrimental mutations (ASXL1, EZH2, SRSF2, IDH1/2) with an hazard ratio of 0.57 (95% confidence interval: 0.30-1.08) vs best available therapy. These data indicate that clinical efficacy and survival improvement may occur across different molecular subsets of patients with MF treated with ruxolitinib.

JAK inhibition with ruxolitinib versus best available therapy for myelofibrosis.

BACKGROUND: Treatment options for myelofibrosis are limited. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of ruxolitinib, a potent and selective Janus kinase (JAK) 1 and 2 inhibitor, as compared with the best available therapy, in patients with myelofibrosis. METHODS: We assigned 219 patients with intermediate-2 or high-risk primary myelofibrosis, post-polycythemia vera myelofibrosis, or post-essential thrombocythemia myelofibrosis to receive oral ruxolitinib or the best available therapy. The primary end point and key secondary end point of the study were the percentage of patients with at least a 35% reduction in spleen volume at week 48 and at week 24, respectively, as assessed with the use of magnetic resonance imaging or computed tomography. RESULTS: A total of 28% of the patients in the ruxolitinib group had at least a 35% reduction in spleen volume at week 48, as compared with 0% in the group receiving the best available therapy (P<0.001); the corresponding percentages at week 24 were 32% and 0% (P<0.001). At 48 weeks, the mean palpable spleen length had decreased by 56% with ruxolitinib but had increased by 4% with the best available therapy. The median duration of response with ruxolitinib was not reached, with 80% of patients still having a response at a median follow-up of 12 months. Patients in the ruxolitinib group had an improvement in overall quality-of-life measures and a reduction in symptoms associated with myelofibrosis. The most common hematologic abnormalities of grade 3 or higher in either group were thrombocytopenia and anemia, which were managed with a dose reduction, interruption of treatment, or transfusion. One patient in each group discontinued treatment owing to thrombocytopenia, and none discontinued owing to anemia. Nonhematologic adverse events were rare and mostly grade 1 or 2. Two cases of acute myeloid leukemia were reported with the best available therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Continuous ruxolitinib therapy, as compared with the best available therapy, was associated with marked and durable reductions in splenomegaly and disease-related symptoms, improvements in role functioning and quality of life, and modest toxic effects. An influence on overall survival has not yet been shown. (Funded by Novartis Pharmaceuticals; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00934544.).

Three-year efficacy, safety, and survival findings from COMFORT-II, a phase 3 study comparing ruxolitinib with best available therapy for myelofibrosis.

Ruxolitinib is a potent Janus kinase (JAK)1/JAK2 inhibitor that has demonstrated rapid reductions in splenomegaly and marked improvement in disease-related symptoms and quality of life in patients with myelofibrosis (MF). The present analysis reports the 3-year follow-up (median, 151 weeks) of the efficacy and safety of Controlled Myelofibrosis Study With Oral Janus-associated Kinase (JAK) Inhibitor Treatment-II (the COMFORT-II Trial), comparing ruxolitinib with the best available therapy (BAT) in 219 patients with intermediate-2 and high-risk MF. In the ruxolitinib arm, with continued therapy, spleen volume reductions of ≥35% by magnetic resonance imaging (equivalent to approximately 50% reduction by palpation) were sustained for at least 144 weeks, with the probability of 50% (95% confidence interval [CI], 36-63) among patients achieving such degree of response. At the time of this analysis, 45% of the patients randomized to ruxolitinib remained on treatment. Ruxolitinib continues to be well tolerated. Anemia and thrombocytopenia were the main toxicities, but they were generally manageable, improved over time, and rarely led to treatment discontinuation (1% and 3.6% of patients, respectively). No single nonhematologic adverse event led to definitive ruxolitinib discontinuation in more than 1 patient. Additionally, patients randomized to ruxolitinib showed longer overall survival than those randomized to BAT (hazard ratio, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.28-0.85; log-rank test, P = .009).

A pooled analysis of overall survival in COMFORT-I and COMFORT-II, 2 randomized phase III trials of ruxolitinib for the treatment of myelofibrosis.

Ruxolitinib, a potent Janus kinase 1/2 inhibitor, resulted in rapid and durable improvements in splenomegaly and disease-related symptoms in the 2 phase III COMFORT studies. In addition, ruxolitinib was associated with prolonged survival compared with placebo (COMFORT-I) and best available therapy (COMFORT-II). We present a pooled analysis of overall survival in the COMFORT studies using an intent-to-treat analysis and an analysis correcting for crossover in the control arms. Overall, 301 patients received ruxolitinib (COMFORT-I, n=155; COMFORT-II, n=146) and 227 patients received placebo (n=154) or best available therapy (n=73). After a median three years of follow up, intent-to-treat analysis showed that patients who received ruxolitinib had prolonged survival compared with patients who received placebo or best available therapy [hazard ratio=0.65; 95% confidence interval (95%CI): 0.46-0.90; P=0.01]; the crossover-corrected hazard ratio was 0.29 (95%CI: 0.13-0.63). Both patients with intermediate-2- or high-risk disease showed prolonged survival, and patients with high-risk disease in the ruxolitinib group had survival similar to that of patients with intermediate-2-risk disease in the control group. The Kaplan-Meier estimate of overall survival at week 144 was 78% in the ruxolitinib arm, 61% in the intent-to-treat control arm, and 31% in the crossover-adjusted control arm. While larger spleen size at baseline was prognostic for shortened survival, reductions in spleen size with ruxolitinib treatment correlated with longer survival. These findings are consistent with previous reports and support that ruxolitinib offers a survival benefit for patients with myelofibrosis compared with conventional therapies. (clinicaltrials.gov identifiers: COMFORT-I, NCT00952289; COMFORT-II, NCT00934544).

A new method for modeling preoperative diagnosis of ovarian tumors.

In this paper, we present a sequential nonuniform procedure, an inference method which combines feature selection based on the Kullback information gain and a step-wise classification procedure to produce a reliable, interpretable, and robust model. We applied the model to an ovarian tumor data set to distinguish between malignant and benign tumors. The performance of the model was assessed using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis and gave an overall accuracy over 85%, and area under the curve (AUC) of 0.887 which compares well with existing methods. The method presented here is significant because of its ability to handle missing values, and it only uses a small number of variables which are graded according to their discriminative relevance. This, together with the fact that the resulting model is interpretable and has good performance, is likely to lead to widespread clinical acceptance of the method. The method is also generic and can be readily adapted for other classifications problems in biomedicine.

The use of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents with ruxolitinib in patients with myelofibrosis in COMFORT-II: an open-label, phase 3 study assessing efficacy and safety of ruxolitinib versus best available therapy in the treatment of myelofibrosis.

BACKGROUND: Anemia is considered a negative prognostic risk factor for survival in patients with myelofibrosis. Most patients with myelofibrosis are anemic, and 35-54 % present with anemia at diagnosis. Ruxolitinib, a potent inhibitor of Janus kinase (JAK) 1 and JAK2, was associated with an overall survival benefit and improvements in splenomegaly and patient-reported outcomes in patients with myelofibrosis in the two phase 3 COMFORT studies. Consistent with the ruxolitinib mechanism of action, anemia was a frequently reported adverse event. In clinical practice, anemia is sometimes managed with erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs). This post hoc analysis evaluated the safety and efficacy of concomitant ruxolitinib and ESA administration in patients enrolled in COMFORT-II, an open-label, phase 3 study comparing the efficacy and safety of ruxolitinib with best available therapy for treatment of myelofibrosis. Patients were randomized (2:1) to receive ruxolitinib 15 or 20 mg twice daily or best available therapy. Spleen volume was assessed by magnetic resonance imaging or computed tomography scan. RESULTS: Thirteen of 146 ruxolitinib-treated patients had concomitant ESA administration (+ESA). The median exposure to ruxolitinib was 114 weeks in the +ESA group and 111 weeks in the overall ruxolitinib arm; the median ruxolitinib dose intensity was 33 mg/day for each group. Six weeks before the first ESA administration, 10 of the 13 patients had grade 3/4 hemoglobin abnormalities. These had improved to grade 2 in 7 of the 13 patients by 6 weeks after the first ESA administration. The rate of packed red blood cell transfusions per month within 12 weeks before and after first ESA administration remained the same in 1 patient, decreased in 2 patients, and increased in 3 patients; 7 patients remained transfusion independent. Reductions in splenomegaly were observed in 69 % of evaluable patients (9/13) following first ESA administration. CONCLUSIONS: Concomitant use of an ESA with ruxolitinib was well tolerated and did not affect the efficacy of ruxolitinib. Further investigations evaluating the effects of ESAs to alleviate anemia in ruxolitinib-treated patients are warranted (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT00934544; July 6, 2009).

Preoperative prediction of malignancy of ovarian tumours using modified sequential non-uniform procedure.

In this paper, we present an extension of sequential non-uniform procedure (SNuP) with application of the method to ovarian tumour data, obtained during multicentre study by the International Ovarian Tumour Analysis Group (IOTA). The inference method combines feature selection based on the Kullback information gain and a step-wise classification procedure to produce a reliable, interpretable and robust model. In particular, we extend SNuP to enable it to handle continuous variables without the need for manual specification of thresholds. We applied the extended model to an ovarian tumour data set to distinguish between malignant and benign tumours. The performance of the model was assessed using ROC analysis and gave 86.9% of sensitivity and 84.3% of specificity with overall accuracy level of 84.9%.