Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
The validity of progression-free survival 2 as a surrogate trial end point for overall survival.
Woodford, Rachel G; Zhou, Deborah D-X; Kok, Peey-Sei; Lord, Sally J; Friedlander, Michael; Marschner, Ian C; Simes, R John; Lee, Chee Khoon.
Afiliação
  • Woodford RG; National Health and Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Centre, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
  • Zhou DD; St George Cancer Care Centre, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
  • Kok PS; Chris O'Brien Lifehouse, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
  • Lord SJ; National Health and Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Centre, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
  • Friedlander M; National Health and Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Centre, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
  • Marschner IC; Nelune Cancer Centre, Prince of Wales Hospital and Prince of Wales Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
  • Simes RJ; National Health and Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Centre, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
  • Lee CK; National Health and Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Centre, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Cancer ; 128(7): 1449-1457, 2022 04 01.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34985773
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Overall survival (OS) is the gold-standard end point for oncology trials. However, the availability of multiple therapeutic options after progression and crossover to receive investigational agents confound and delay OS data maturation. Progression-free survival 2 (PFS-2), defined as the time from randomization to progression on first subsequent therapy, has been proposed as a surrogate for OS. Using a meta-analytic approach, the authors aimed to assess the association between OS and PFS-2 and compare this with progression-free survival 1 (PFS-1) and the objective response rate (ORR).

METHODS:

An electronic literature search was performed to identify randomized trials of systemic therapies in advanced solid tumors that reported PFS-2 as a prespecified end point. Correlations between OS and PFS-2, OS and PFS-1, and OS and ORR as hazard ratios (HRs) or odds ratios (ORs) were assessed via linear regression weighted by trial size.

RESULTS:

Thirty-eight trials were included, and they comprised 19,031 patients across 8 tumor types. PFS-2 displayed a moderate correlation with OS (r = 0.67; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.08-0.69). Conversely, correlations of ORR (r = 0.12; 95% CI, 0.00-0.13) and PFS-1 (r = 0.21; 95% CI, 0.00-0.33) were poor. The findings for PFS-2 were consistent for subgroup analyses by treatment type (immunotherapy vs nonimmunotherapy r = 0.67 vs 0.67), survival post progression (<12 vs ≥12 months r = 0.86 vs 0.79), and percentage not receiving subsequent treatment (<50% vs ≥50% r = 0.70 vs 0.63).

CONCLUSIONS:

Across diverse tumors and therapies, the treatment effect on PFS-2 correlated moderately with the treatment effect on OS. PFS-2 performed consistently better than PFS-1 and ORR, regardless of postprogression treatment and postprogression survival. PFS-2 should be included as a key trial end point in future randomized trials of solid tumors.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Neoplasias Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials / Prognostic_studies Limite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: Cancer Ano de publicação: 2022 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Austrália

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Neoplasias Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials / Prognostic_studies Limite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: Cancer Ano de publicação: 2022 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Austrália