Cargando…
Evaluation of Continuous Tumor-Size–Based End Points as Surrogates for Overall Survival in Randomized Clinical Trials in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
IMPORTANCE: Tumor measurements can be used to estimate time to nadir and depth of nadir as potential surrogates for overall survival (OS). OBJECTIVE: To assess time to nadir and depth of nadir as surrogates for OS in metastatic colorectal cancer. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Pooled analysis of...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
American Medical Association
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6755539/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31539075 http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.11750 |
_version_ | 1783453253177966592 |
---|---|
author | Burzykowski, Tomasz Coart, Elisabeth Saad, Everardo D. Shi, Qian Sommeijer, Dirkje W. Bokemeyer, Carsten Díaz-Rubio, Eduardo Douillard, Jean-Yves Falcone, Alfredo Fuchs, Charles S. Goldberg, Richard M. Hecht, J. Randolph Hoff, Paulo M. Hurwitz, Herbert Kabbinavar, Fairooz F. Koopman, Miriam Maughan, Timothy S. Punt, Cornelis J. A. Saltz, Leonard Schmoll, Hans-Joachim Seymour, Matthew T. Tebbutt, Niall C. Tournigand, Christophe Van Cutsem, Eric de Gramont, Aimery Zalcberg, John R. Buyse, Marc |
author_facet | Burzykowski, Tomasz Coart, Elisabeth Saad, Everardo D. Shi, Qian Sommeijer, Dirkje W. Bokemeyer, Carsten Díaz-Rubio, Eduardo Douillard, Jean-Yves Falcone, Alfredo Fuchs, Charles S. Goldberg, Richard M. Hecht, J. Randolph Hoff, Paulo M. Hurwitz, Herbert Kabbinavar, Fairooz F. Koopman, Miriam Maughan, Timothy S. Punt, Cornelis J. A. Saltz, Leonard Schmoll, Hans-Joachim Seymour, Matthew T. Tebbutt, Niall C. Tournigand, Christophe Van Cutsem, Eric de Gramont, Aimery Zalcberg, John R. Buyse, Marc |
author_sort | Burzykowski, Tomasz |
collection | PubMed |
description | IMPORTANCE: Tumor measurements can be used to estimate time to nadir and depth of nadir as potential surrogates for overall survival (OS). OBJECTIVE: To assess time to nadir and depth of nadir as surrogates for OS in metastatic colorectal cancer. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Pooled analysis of 20 randomized clinical trials within the Aide et Recherche en Cancerologie Digestive database, which contains academic and industry-sponsored trials, was conducted. Three sets of comparisons were performed: chemotherapy alone, antiangiogenic agents, and anti–epidermal growth factor receptor agents in first-line treatment for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Surrogacy of time to nadir and depth of nadir was assessed at the trial level based on joint modeling of relative tumor-size change vs baseline and OS. Treatment effects on time to nadir and on depth of nadir were defined in terms of between-arm differences in time to nadir and in depth of nadir, and both were assessed in linear regressions for their correlation with treatment effects (hazard ratios) on OS within each set. The strengths of association were quantified using sample-size–weighted coefficients of determination (R(2)), with values closer to 1.00 indicating stronger association. At the patient level, the correlation was assessed between modeled relative tumor-size change and OS. RESULTS: For 14 chemotherapy comparisons in 4289 patients, the R(2) value was 0.63 (95% CI, 0.30-0.96) for the association between treatment effects on time to nadir and OS and 0.08 (95% CI, 0-0.37) for depth of nadir and OS. For 11 antiangiogenic agent comparisons (4854 patients), corresponding values of R(2) were 0.25 (95% CI, 0-0.72) and 0.06 (95% CI, 0-0.35). For 8 anti–epidermal growth factor receptor comparisons (2684 patients), corresponding values of R(2) were 0.24 (95% CI, 0-0.83) and 0.21 (95% CI, 0-0.78). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In contrast with early reports favoring depth of response as a surrogate, these results suggest that neither time to nadir nor depth of nadir is an acceptable surrogate for OS in the first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6755539 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | American Medical Association |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-67555392019-10-07 Evaluation of Continuous Tumor-Size–Based End Points as Surrogates for Overall Survival in Randomized Clinical Trials in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Burzykowski, Tomasz Coart, Elisabeth Saad, Everardo D. Shi, Qian Sommeijer, Dirkje W. Bokemeyer, Carsten Díaz-Rubio, Eduardo Douillard, Jean-Yves Falcone, Alfredo Fuchs, Charles S. Goldberg, Richard M. Hecht, J. Randolph Hoff, Paulo M. Hurwitz, Herbert Kabbinavar, Fairooz F. Koopman, Miriam Maughan, Timothy S. Punt, Cornelis J. A. Saltz, Leonard Schmoll, Hans-Joachim Seymour, Matthew T. Tebbutt, Niall C. Tournigand, Christophe Van Cutsem, Eric de Gramont, Aimery Zalcberg, John R. Buyse, Marc JAMA Netw Open Original Investigation IMPORTANCE: Tumor measurements can be used to estimate time to nadir and depth of nadir as potential surrogates for overall survival (OS). OBJECTIVE: To assess time to nadir and depth of nadir as surrogates for OS in metastatic colorectal cancer. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Pooled analysis of 20 randomized clinical trials within the Aide et Recherche en Cancerologie Digestive database, which contains academic and industry-sponsored trials, was conducted. Three sets of comparisons were performed: chemotherapy alone, antiangiogenic agents, and anti–epidermal growth factor receptor agents in first-line treatment for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Surrogacy of time to nadir and depth of nadir was assessed at the trial level based on joint modeling of relative tumor-size change vs baseline and OS. Treatment effects on time to nadir and on depth of nadir were defined in terms of between-arm differences in time to nadir and in depth of nadir, and both were assessed in linear regressions for their correlation with treatment effects (hazard ratios) on OS within each set. The strengths of association were quantified using sample-size–weighted coefficients of determination (R(2)), with values closer to 1.00 indicating stronger association. At the patient level, the correlation was assessed between modeled relative tumor-size change and OS. RESULTS: For 14 chemotherapy comparisons in 4289 patients, the R(2) value was 0.63 (95% CI, 0.30-0.96) for the association between treatment effects on time to nadir and OS and 0.08 (95% CI, 0-0.37) for depth of nadir and OS. For 11 antiangiogenic agent comparisons (4854 patients), corresponding values of R(2) were 0.25 (95% CI, 0-0.72) and 0.06 (95% CI, 0-0.35). For 8 anti–epidermal growth factor receptor comparisons (2684 patients), corresponding values of R(2) were 0.24 (95% CI, 0-0.83) and 0.21 (95% CI, 0-0.78). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In contrast with early reports favoring depth of response as a surrogate, these results suggest that neither time to nadir nor depth of nadir is an acceptable surrogate for OS in the first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. American Medical Association 2019-09-20 /pmc/articles/PMC6755539/ /pubmed/31539075 http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.11750 Text en Copyright 2019 Burzykowski T et al. JAMA Network Open. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC-BY License. |
spellingShingle | Original Investigation Burzykowski, Tomasz Coart, Elisabeth Saad, Everardo D. Shi, Qian Sommeijer, Dirkje W. Bokemeyer, Carsten Díaz-Rubio, Eduardo Douillard, Jean-Yves Falcone, Alfredo Fuchs, Charles S. Goldberg, Richard M. Hecht, J. Randolph Hoff, Paulo M. Hurwitz, Herbert Kabbinavar, Fairooz F. Koopman, Miriam Maughan, Timothy S. Punt, Cornelis J. A. Saltz, Leonard Schmoll, Hans-Joachim Seymour, Matthew T. Tebbutt, Niall C. Tournigand, Christophe Van Cutsem, Eric de Gramont, Aimery Zalcberg, John R. Buyse, Marc Evaluation of Continuous Tumor-Size–Based End Points as Surrogates for Overall Survival in Randomized Clinical Trials in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer |
title | Evaluation of Continuous Tumor-Size–Based End Points as Surrogates for Overall Survival in Randomized Clinical Trials in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer |
title_full | Evaluation of Continuous Tumor-Size–Based End Points as Surrogates for Overall Survival in Randomized Clinical Trials in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer |
title_fullStr | Evaluation of Continuous Tumor-Size–Based End Points as Surrogates for Overall Survival in Randomized Clinical Trials in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer |
title_full_unstemmed | Evaluation of Continuous Tumor-Size–Based End Points as Surrogates for Overall Survival in Randomized Clinical Trials in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer |
title_short | Evaluation of Continuous Tumor-Size–Based End Points as Surrogates for Overall Survival in Randomized Clinical Trials in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer |
title_sort | evaluation of continuous tumor-size–based end points as surrogates for overall survival in randomized clinical trials in metastatic colorectal cancer |
topic | Original Investigation |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6755539/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31539075 http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.11750 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT burzykowskitomasz evaluationofcontinuoustumorsizebasedendpointsassurrogatesforoverallsurvivalinrandomizedclinicaltrialsinmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT coartelisabeth evaluationofcontinuoustumorsizebasedendpointsassurrogatesforoverallsurvivalinrandomizedclinicaltrialsinmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT saadeverardod evaluationofcontinuoustumorsizebasedendpointsassurrogatesforoverallsurvivalinrandomizedclinicaltrialsinmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT shiqian evaluationofcontinuoustumorsizebasedendpointsassurrogatesforoverallsurvivalinrandomizedclinicaltrialsinmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT sommeijerdirkjew evaluationofcontinuoustumorsizebasedendpointsassurrogatesforoverallsurvivalinrandomizedclinicaltrialsinmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT bokemeyercarsten evaluationofcontinuoustumorsizebasedendpointsassurrogatesforoverallsurvivalinrandomizedclinicaltrialsinmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT diazrubioeduardo evaluationofcontinuoustumorsizebasedendpointsassurrogatesforoverallsurvivalinrandomizedclinicaltrialsinmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT douillardjeanyves evaluationofcontinuoustumorsizebasedendpointsassurrogatesforoverallsurvivalinrandomizedclinicaltrialsinmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT falconealfredo evaluationofcontinuoustumorsizebasedendpointsassurrogatesforoverallsurvivalinrandomizedclinicaltrialsinmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT fuchscharless evaluationofcontinuoustumorsizebasedendpointsassurrogatesforoverallsurvivalinrandomizedclinicaltrialsinmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT goldbergrichardm evaluationofcontinuoustumorsizebasedendpointsassurrogatesforoverallsurvivalinrandomizedclinicaltrialsinmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT hechtjrandolph evaluationofcontinuoustumorsizebasedendpointsassurrogatesforoverallsurvivalinrandomizedclinicaltrialsinmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT hoffpaulom evaluationofcontinuoustumorsizebasedendpointsassurrogatesforoverallsurvivalinrandomizedclinicaltrialsinmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT hurwitzherbert evaluationofcontinuoustumorsizebasedendpointsassurrogatesforoverallsurvivalinrandomizedclinicaltrialsinmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT kabbinavarfairoozf evaluationofcontinuoustumorsizebasedendpointsassurrogatesforoverallsurvivalinrandomizedclinicaltrialsinmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT koopmanmiriam evaluationofcontinuoustumorsizebasedendpointsassurrogatesforoverallsurvivalinrandomizedclinicaltrialsinmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT maughantimothys evaluationofcontinuoustumorsizebasedendpointsassurrogatesforoverallsurvivalinrandomizedclinicaltrialsinmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT puntcornelisja evaluationofcontinuoustumorsizebasedendpointsassurrogatesforoverallsurvivalinrandomizedclinicaltrialsinmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT saltzleonard evaluationofcontinuoustumorsizebasedendpointsassurrogatesforoverallsurvivalinrandomizedclinicaltrialsinmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT schmollhansjoachim evaluationofcontinuoustumorsizebasedendpointsassurrogatesforoverallsurvivalinrandomizedclinicaltrialsinmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT seymourmatthewt evaluationofcontinuoustumorsizebasedendpointsassurrogatesforoverallsurvivalinrandomizedclinicaltrialsinmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT tebbuttniallc evaluationofcontinuoustumorsizebasedendpointsassurrogatesforoverallsurvivalinrandomizedclinicaltrialsinmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT tournigandchristophe evaluationofcontinuoustumorsizebasedendpointsassurrogatesforoverallsurvivalinrandomizedclinicaltrialsinmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT vancutsemeric evaluationofcontinuoustumorsizebasedendpointsassurrogatesforoverallsurvivalinrandomizedclinicaltrialsinmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT degramontaimery evaluationofcontinuoustumorsizebasedendpointsassurrogatesforoverallsurvivalinrandomizedclinicaltrialsinmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT zalcbergjohnr evaluationofcontinuoustumorsizebasedendpointsassurrogatesforoverallsurvivalinrandomizedclinicaltrialsinmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT buysemarc evaluationofcontinuoustumorsizebasedendpointsassurrogatesforoverallsurvivalinrandomizedclinicaltrialsinmetastaticcolorectalcancer |