Cargando…

Comparison of Solid Tumor Treatment Response Observed in Clinical Practice With Response Reported in Clinical Trials

IMPORTANCE: In clinical trials supporting the regulatory approval of oncology drugs, solid tumor response is assessed using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST). Calculation of RECIST-based responses requires sequential, timed imaging data, which presents challenges to the method’s...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Feinberg, Bruce A., Zettler, Marjorie E., Klink, Andrew J., Lee, Choo H., Gajra, Ajeet, Kish, Jonathan K.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: American Medical Association 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7907955/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33630085
http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.36741
_version_ 1783655605493301248
author Feinberg, Bruce A.
Zettler, Marjorie E.
Klink, Andrew J.
Lee, Choo H.
Gajra, Ajeet
Kish, Jonathan K.
author_facet Feinberg, Bruce A.
Zettler, Marjorie E.
Klink, Andrew J.
Lee, Choo H.
Gajra, Ajeet
Kish, Jonathan K.
author_sort Feinberg, Bruce A.
collection PubMed
description IMPORTANCE: In clinical trials supporting the regulatory approval of oncology drugs, solid tumor response is assessed using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST). Calculation of RECIST-based responses requires sequential, timed imaging data, which presents challenges to the method’s application in real-world evidence research. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the feasibility and validity of a novel real-world RECIST method in assessing tumor burden associated with therapy for a large heterogeneous patient population undergoing treatment in routine clinical practice. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This cohort study used physician-abstracted data pooled from retrospective, multisite electronic health record (EHR) review studies of patients treated with anticancer drugs at US oncology practices from 2014 through 2017. Included patients were receiving first-line treatment for thyroid cancer, breast cancer, or metastatic melanoma. Data were analyzed from March through August 2020. EXPOSURES: Undergoing treatment with immunotherapy or targeted therapy. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Tumor response was classified according to RECIST guidelines (ie, change in sum diameter of target lesions) post hoc with measurements derived from imaging scans and reports. RESULTS: Among 1308 completed electronic case report forms, 956 forms (73.1%) had adequate data to classify real-world RECIST response. The greatest difference between physician-recorded responses and real-world RECIST–based responses was found in the proportion of complete responses: 118 responses (12.3%) vs 46 responses (4.8%) (P < .001). Among 609 patients in the metastatic melanoma population, complete responses were reported in 112 physician-recorded responses (18.4%) vs 44 real-world RECIST–based responses (7.2%) (P < .001), compared with 11 of 247 responses (4.5%) to 31 of 192 responses (16.1%) across pivotal trials of the same melanoma therapies. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: These findings suggest that comparing tumor lesion sizes and categorizing treatment response according to RECIST guidelines may be feasible using real-world data. This study found that physician-recorded assessments were associated with overestimation of treatment response, with the largest overestimation among complete responses. Real-world RECIST–based assessments were associated with better approximations of tumor response reported in clinical trials compared with those reported in EHRs.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7907955
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher American Medical Association
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-79079552021-03-15 Comparison of Solid Tumor Treatment Response Observed in Clinical Practice With Response Reported in Clinical Trials Feinberg, Bruce A. Zettler, Marjorie E. Klink, Andrew J. Lee, Choo H. Gajra, Ajeet Kish, Jonathan K. JAMA Netw Open Original Investigation IMPORTANCE: In clinical trials supporting the regulatory approval of oncology drugs, solid tumor response is assessed using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST). Calculation of RECIST-based responses requires sequential, timed imaging data, which presents challenges to the method’s application in real-world evidence research. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the feasibility and validity of a novel real-world RECIST method in assessing tumor burden associated with therapy for a large heterogeneous patient population undergoing treatment in routine clinical practice. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This cohort study used physician-abstracted data pooled from retrospective, multisite electronic health record (EHR) review studies of patients treated with anticancer drugs at US oncology practices from 2014 through 2017. Included patients were receiving first-line treatment for thyroid cancer, breast cancer, or metastatic melanoma. Data were analyzed from March through August 2020. EXPOSURES: Undergoing treatment with immunotherapy or targeted therapy. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Tumor response was classified according to RECIST guidelines (ie, change in sum diameter of target lesions) post hoc with measurements derived from imaging scans and reports. RESULTS: Among 1308 completed electronic case report forms, 956 forms (73.1%) had adequate data to classify real-world RECIST response. The greatest difference between physician-recorded responses and real-world RECIST–based responses was found in the proportion of complete responses: 118 responses (12.3%) vs 46 responses (4.8%) (P < .001). Among 609 patients in the metastatic melanoma population, complete responses were reported in 112 physician-recorded responses (18.4%) vs 44 real-world RECIST–based responses (7.2%) (P < .001), compared with 11 of 247 responses (4.5%) to 31 of 192 responses (16.1%) across pivotal trials of the same melanoma therapies. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: These findings suggest that comparing tumor lesion sizes and categorizing treatment response according to RECIST guidelines may be feasible using real-world data. This study found that physician-recorded assessments were associated with overestimation of treatment response, with the largest overestimation among complete responses. Real-world RECIST–based assessments were associated with better approximations of tumor response reported in clinical trials compared with those reported in EHRs. American Medical Association 2021-02-25 /pmc/articles/PMC7907955/ /pubmed/33630085 http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.36741 Text en Copyright 2021 Feinberg BA et al. JAMA Network Open. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC-BY-NC-ND License.
spellingShingle Original Investigation
Feinberg, Bruce A.
Zettler, Marjorie E.
Klink, Andrew J.
Lee, Choo H.
Gajra, Ajeet
Kish, Jonathan K.
Comparison of Solid Tumor Treatment Response Observed in Clinical Practice With Response Reported in Clinical Trials
title Comparison of Solid Tumor Treatment Response Observed in Clinical Practice With Response Reported in Clinical Trials
title_full Comparison of Solid Tumor Treatment Response Observed in Clinical Practice With Response Reported in Clinical Trials
title_fullStr Comparison of Solid Tumor Treatment Response Observed in Clinical Practice With Response Reported in Clinical Trials
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Solid Tumor Treatment Response Observed in Clinical Practice With Response Reported in Clinical Trials
title_short Comparison of Solid Tumor Treatment Response Observed in Clinical Practice With Response Reported in Clinical Trials
title_sort comparison of solid tumor treatment response observed in clinical practice with response reported in clinical trials
topic Original Investigation
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7907955/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33630085
http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.36741
work_keys_str_mv AT feinbergbrucea comparisonofsolidtumortreatmentresponseobservedinclinicalpracticewithresponsereportedinclinicaltrials
AT zettlermarjoriee comparisonofsolidtumortreatmentresponseobservedinclinicalpracticewithresponsereportedinclinicaltrials
AT klinkandrewj comparisonofsolidtumortreatmentresponseobservedinclinicalpracticewithresponsereportedinclinicaltrials
AT leechooh comparisonofsolidtumortreatmentresponseobservedinclinicalpracticewithresponsereportedinclinicaltrials
AT gajraajeet comparisonofsolidtumortreatmentresponseobservedinclinicalpracticewithresponsereportedinclinicaltrials
AT kishjonathank comparisonofsolidtumortreatmentresponseobservedinclinicalpracticewithresponsereportedinclinicaltrials