Cargando…
The generalisability of randomised clinical trials: an interim external validity analysis of the ongoing SENOMAC trial in sentinel lymph node-positive breast cancer
PURPOSE: None of the key randomised trials on the omission of axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) in sentinel lymph-positive breast cancer have reported external validity, even though results indicate selection bias. Our aim was to assess the external validity of the ongoing randomised SENOMAC tri...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer US
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7031168/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31989379 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10549-020-05537-1 |
_version_ | 1783499317608185856 |
---|---|
author | de Boniface, Jana Ahlgren, Johan Andersson, Yvette Bergkvist, Leif Frisell, Jan Lundstedt, Dan Olofsson Bagge, Roger Rydén, Lisa Sund, Malin |
author_facet | de Boniface, Jana Ahlgren, Johan Andersson, Yvette Bergkvist, Leif Frisell, Jan Lundstedt, Dan Olofsson Bagge, Roger Rydén, Lisa Sund, Malin |
author_sort | de Boniface, Jana |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: None of the key randomised trials on the omission of axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) in sentinel lymph-positive breast cancer have reported external validity, even though results indicate selection bias. Our aim was to assess the external validity of the ongoing randomised SENOMAC trial by comparing characteristics of Swedish SENOMAC trial participants with non-included eligible patients registered in the Swedish National Breast Cancer Register (NKBC). METHODS: In the ongoing non-inferiority European SENOMAC trial, clinically node-negative cT1–T3 breast cancer patients with up to two sentinel lymph node macrometastases are randomised to undergo completion ALND or not. Both breast-conserving surgery and mastectomy are eligible interventions. Data from NKBC were extracted for the years 2016 and 2017, and patient and tumour characteristics compared with Swedish trial participants from the same years. RESULTS: Overall, 306 NKBC cases from non-participating and 847 NKBC cases from participating sites (excluding SENOMAC participants) were compared with 463 SENOMAC trial participants. Patients belonging to the middle age groups (p = 0.015), with smaller tumours (p = 0.013) treated by breast-conserving therapy (50.3 versus 47.1 versus 65.2%, p < 0.001) and less nodal tumour burden (only 1 macrometastasis in 78.8 versus 79.9 versus 87.3%, p = 0.001) were over-represented in the trial population. Time trends indicated, however, that differences may be mitigated over time. CONCLUSIONS: This interim external validity analysis specifically addresses selection mechanisms during an ongoing trial, potentially increasing generalisability by the time full accrual is reached. Similar validity checks should be an integral part of prospective clinical trials. Trial registration: NCT 02240472, retrospective registration date September 14, 2015 after trial initiation on January 31, 2015 |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7031168 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Springer US |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-70311682020-03-03 The generalisability of randomised clinical trials: an interim external validity analysis of the ongoing SENOMAC trial in sentinel lymph node-positive breast cancer de Boniface, Jana Ahlgren, Johan Andersson, Yvette Bergkvist, Leif Frisell, Jan Lundstedt, Dan Olofsson Bagge, Roger Rydén, Lisa Sund, Malin Breast Cancer Res Treat Clinical Trial PURPOSE: None of the key randomised trials on the omission of axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) in sentinel lymph-positive breast cancer have reported external validity, even though results indicate selection bias. Our aim was to assess the external validity of the ongoing randomised SENOMAC trial by comparing characteristics of Swedish SENOMAC trial participants with non-included eligible patients registered in the Swedish National Breast Cancer Register (NKBC). METHODS: In the ongoing non-inferiority European SENOMAC trial, clinically node-negative cT1–T3 breast cancer patients with up to two sentinel lymph node macrometastases are randomised to undergo completion ALND or not. Both breast-conserving surgery and mastectomy are eligible interventions. Data from NKBC were extracted for the years 2016 and 2017, and patient and tumour characteristics compared with Swedish trial participants from the same years. RESULTS: Overall, 306 NKBC cases from non-participating and 847 NKBC cases from participating sites (excluding SENOMAC participants) were compared with 463 SENOMAC trial participants. Patients belonging to the middle age groups (p = 0.015), with smaller tumours (p = 0.013) treated by breast-conserving therapy (50.3 versus 47.1 versus 65.2%, p < 0.001) and less nodal tumour burden (only 1 macrometastasis in 78.8 versus 79.9 versus 87.3%, p = 0.001) were over-represented in the trial population. Time trends indicated, however, that differences may be mitigated over time. CONCLUSIONS: This interim external validity analysis specifically addresses selection mechanisms during an ongoing trial, potentially increasing generalisability by the time full accrual is reached. Similar validity checks should be an integral part of prospective clinical trials. Trial registration: NCT 02240472, retrospective registration date September 14, 2015 after trial initiation on January 31, 2015 Springer US 2020-01-27 2020 /pmc/articles/PMC7031168/ /pubmed/31989379 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10549-020-05537-1 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis 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/. |
spellingShingle | Clinical Trial de Boniface, Jana Ahlgren, Johan Andersson, Yvette Bergkvist, Leif Frisell, Jan Lundstedt, Dan Olofsson Bagge, Roger Rydén, Lisa Sund, Malin The generalisability of randomised clinical trials: an interim external validity analysis of the ongoing SENOMAC trial in sentinel lymph node-positive breast cancer |
title | The generalisability of randomised clinical trials: an interim external validity analysis of the ongoing SENOMAC trial in sentinel lymph node-positive breast cancer |
title_full | The generalisability of randomised clinical trials: an interim external validity analysis of the ongoing SENOMAC trial in sentinel lymph node-positive breast cancer |
title_fullStr | The generalisability of randomised clinical trials: an interim external validity analysis of the ongoing SENOMAC trial in sentinel lymph node-positive breast cancer |
title_full_unstemmed | The generalisability of randomised clinical trials: an interim external validity analysis of the ongoing SENOMAC trial in sentinel lymph node-positive breast cancer |
title_short | The generalisability of randomised clinical trials: an interim external validity analysis of the ongoing SENOMAC trial in sentinel lymph node-positive breast cancer |
title_sort | generalisability of randomised clinical trials: an interim external validity analysis of the ongoing senomac trial in sentinel lymph node-positive breast cancer |
topic | Clinical Trial |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7031168/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31989379 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10549-020-05537-1 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT debonifacejana thegeneralisabilityofrandomisedclinicaltrialsaninterimexternalvalidityanalysisoftheongoingsenomactrialinsentinellymphnodepositivebreastcancer AT ahlgrenjohan thegeneralisabilityofrandomisedclinicaltrialsaninterimexternalvalidityanalysisoftheongoingsenomactrialinsentinellymphnodepositivebreastcancer AT anderssonyvette thegeneralisabilityofrandomisedclinicaltrialsaninterimexternalvalidityanalysisoftheongoingsenomactrialinsentinellymphnodepositivebreastcancer AT bergkvistleif thegeneralisabilityofrandomisedclinicaltrialsaninterimexternalvalidityanalysisoftheongoingsenomactrialinsentinellymphnodepositivebreastcancer AT friselljan thegeneralisabilityofrandomisedclinicaltrialsaninterimexternalvalidityanalysisoftheongoingsenomactrialinsentinellymphnodepositivebreastcancer AT lundstedtdan thegeneralisabilityofrandomisedclinicaltrialsaninterimexternalvalidityanalysisoftheongoingsenomactrialinsentinellymphnodepositivebreastcancer AT olofssonbaggeroger thegeneralisabilityofrandomisedclinicaltrialsaninterimexternalvalidityanalysisoftheongoingsenomactrialinsentinellymphnodepositivebreastcancer AT rydenlisa thegeneralisabilityofrandomisedclinicaltrialsaninterimexternalvalidityanalysisoftheongoingsenomactrialinsentinellymphnodepositivebreastcancer AT sundmalin thegeneralisabilityofrandomisedclinicaltrialsaninterimexternalvalidityanalysisoftheongoingsenomactrialinsentinellymphnodepositivebreastcancer AT thegeneralisabilityofrandomisedclinicaltrialsaninterimexternalvalidityanalysisoftheongoingsenomactrialinsentinellymphnodepositivebreastcancer AT debonifacejana generalisabilityofrandomisedclinicaltrialsaninterimexternalvalidityanalysisoftheongoingsenomactrialinsentinellymphnodepositivebreastcancer AT ahlgrenjohan generalisabilityofrandomisedclinicaltrialsaninterimexternalvalidityanalysisoftheongoingsenomactrialinsentinellymphnodepositivebreastcancer AT anderssonyvette generalisabilityofrandomisedclinicaltrialsaninterimexternalvalidityanalysisoftheongoingsenomactrialinsentinellymphnodepositivebreastcancer AT bergkvistleif generalisabilityofrandomisedclinicaltrialsaninterimexternalvalidityanalysisoftheongoingsenomactrialinsentinellymphnodepositivebreastcancer AT friselljan generalisabilityofrandomisedclinicaltrialsaninterimexternalvalidityanalysisoftheongoingsenomactrialinsentinellymphnodepositivebreastcancer AT lundstedtdan generalisabilityofrandomisedclinicaltrialsaninterimexternalvalidityanalysisoftheongoingsenomactrialinsentinellymphnodepositivebreastcancer AT olofssonbaggeroger generalisabilityofrandomisedclinicaltrialsaninterimexternalvalidityanalysisoftheongoingsenomactrialinsentinellymphnodepositivebreastcancer AT rydenlisa generalisabilityofrandomisedclinicaltrialsaninterimexternalvalidityanalysisoftheongoingsenomactrialinsentinellymphnodepositivebreastcancer AT sundmalin generalisabilityofrandomisedclinicaltrialsaninterimexternalvalidityanalysisoftheongoingsenomactrialinsentinellymphnodepositivebreastcancer AT generalisabilityofrandomisedclinicaltrialsaninterimexternalvalidityanalysisoftheongoingsenomactrialinsentinellymphnodepositivebreastcancer |