Cargando…
Cross-sectional analysis characterizing the use of rank preserving structural failure time in oncology studies: changes to hazard ratio and frequency of inappropriate use
BACKGROUND: Rank preserving structural failure time (RPSFT) is a statistical method to correct or adjust for crossover in clinical trials, by estimating the counterfactual effect on overall survival (OS) when control arm patients do not receive the interventional drug when their tumor progresses. We...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10239129/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37270500 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-023-07412-y |
_version_ | 1785053433824280576 |
---|---|
author | Prasad, Vinay Kim, Myung Sun Haslam, Alyson |
author_facet | Prasad, Vinay Kim, Myung Sun Haslam, Alyson |
author_sort | Prasad, Vinay |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Rank preserving structural failure time (RPSFT) is a statistical method to correct or adjust for crossover in clinical trials, by estimating the counterfactual effect on overall survival (OS) when control arm patients do not receive the interventional drug when their tumor progresses. We sought to examine the strength of correlation between differences in uncorrected and corrected OS hazard ratios and percentage of crossover, and characterize instances of fundamental and sequential efficacy. METHODS: In a cross-sectional analysis (2003–2023), we reviewed oncology randomized trials that used RPSFT analysis to adjust the OS hazard ratio for patients who crossed over to an anti-cancer drug. We calculated the percentage of RPSFT studies evaluating a drug for fundamental efficacy (with or without a standard of care (SOC)) or sequential efficacy and the correlation between the OS hazard ratio difference (unadjusted and adjusted) and the percentage of crossover. RESULTS: Among 65 studies, the median difference between the uncorrected and corrected OS hazard ratio was −0.1 (quartile 1, quartile 3 : −0.3 to −0.06). The median percentage of crossover was 56% (quartile 1, quartile 3: 37% to 72%). All studies were funded by the industry or had authors who were employees of the industry. Twelve studies (19%) tested a drug’s fundamental efficacy when there was no SOC; 34 studies (52%) tested a drug’s fundamental efficacy when there was already a SOC; and 19 studies (29%) tested a drug’s sequential efficacy. The correlation between the uncorrected and corrected OS hazard ratio difference and the percentage of crossover was 0.44 (95% CI: 0.21 to 0.63). CONCLUSIONS: RPSFT is a common tactic used by the industry to reinterpret trial results. Nineteen percent of RPSFT use is appropriate. We recognize that while crossover can bias OS results, the allowance and handling of crossover in trials should be limited to appropriate circumstances. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13063-023-07412-y. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10239129 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-102391292023-06-04 Cross-sectional analysis characterizing the use of rank preserving structural failure time in oncology studies: changes to hazard ratio and frequency of inappropriate use Prasad, Vinay Kim, Myung Sun Haslam, Alyson Trials Research BACKGROUND: Rank preserving structural failure time (RPSFT) is a statistical method to correct or adjust for crossover in clinical trials, by estimating the counterfactual effect on overall survival (OS) when control arm patients do not receive the interventional drug when their tumor progresses. We sought to examine the strength of correlation between differences in uncorrected and corrected OS hazard ratios and percentage of crossover, and characterize instances of fundamental and sequential efficacy. METHODS: In a cross-sectional analysis (2003–2023), we reviewed oncology randomized trials that used RPSFT analysis to adjust the OS hazard ratio for patients who crossed over to an anti-cancer drug. We calculated the percentage of RPSFT studies evaluating a drug for fundamental efficacy (with or without a standard of care (SOC)) or sequential efficacy and the correlation between the OS hazard ratio difference (unadjusted and adjusted) and the percentage of crossover. RESULTS: Among 65 studies, the median difference between the uncorrected and corrected OS hazard ratio was −0.1 (quartile 1, quartile 3 : −0.3 to −0.06). The median percentage of crossover was 56% (quartile 1, quartile 3: 37% to 72%). All studies were funded by the industry or had authors who were employees of the industry. Twelve studies (19%) tested a drug’s fundamental efficacy when there was no SOC; 34 studies (52%) tested a drug’s fundamental efficacy when there was already a SOC; and 19 studies (29%) tested a drug’s sequential efficacy. The correlation between the uncorrected and corrected OS hazard ratio difference and the percentage of crossover was 0.44 (95% CI: 0.21 to 0.63). CONCLUSIONS: RPSFT is a common tactic used by the industry to reinterpret trial results. Nineteen percent of RPSFT use is appropriate. We recognize that while crossover can bias OS results, the allowance and handling of crossover in trials should be limited to appropriate circumstances. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13063-023-07412-y. BioMed Central 2023-06-03 /pmc/articles/PMC10239129/ /pubmed/37270500 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-023-07412-y Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Prasad, Vinay Kim, Myung Sun Haslam, Alyson Cross-sectional analysis characterizing the use of rank preserving structural failure time in oncology studies: changes to hazard ratio and frequency of inappropriate use |
title | Cross-sectional analysis characterizing the use of rank preserving structural failure time in oncology studies: changes to hazard ratio and frequency of inappropriate use |
title_full | Cross-sectional analysis characterizing the use of rank preserving structural failure time in oncology studies: changes to hazard ratio and frequency of inappropriate use |
title_fullStr | Cross-sectional analysis characterizing the use of rank preserving structural failure time in oncology studies: changes to hazard ratio and frequency of inappropriate use |
title_full_unstemmed | Cross-sectional analysis characterizing the use of rank preserving structural failure time in oncology studies: changes to hazard ratio and frequency of inappropriate use |
title_short | Cross-sectional analysis characterizing the use of rank preserving structural failure time in oncology studies: changes to hazard ratio and frequency of inappropriate use |
title_sort | cross-sectional analysis characterizing the use of rank preserving structural failure time in oncology studies: changes to hazard ratio and frequency of inappropriate use |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10239129/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37270500 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-023-07412-y |
work_keys_str_mv | AT prasadvinay crosssectionalanalysischaracterizingtheuseofrankpreservingstructuralfailuretimeinoncologystudieschangestohazardratioandfrequencyofinappropriateuse AT kimmyungsun crosssectionalanalysischaracterizingtheuseofrankpreservingstructuralfailuretimeinoncologystudieschangestohazardratioandfrequencyofinappropriateuse AT haslamalyson crosssectionalanalysischaracterizingtheuseofrankpreservingstructuralfailuretimeinoncologystudieschangestohazardratioandfrequencyofinappropriateuse |