Cargando…
Impact of Value Frameworks on the Magnitude of Clinical Benefit: Evaluating a Decade of Randomized Trials for Systemic Therapy in Solid Malignancies
In the era of rapid development of new, expensive cancer therapies, value frameworks have been developed to quantify clinical benefit (CB). We assessed the evolution of CB since the 2015 introduction of The American Society of Clinical Oncology and The European Society of Medical Oncology value fram...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8628676/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34898590 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/curroncol28060412 |
_version_ | 1784607044310925312 |
---|---|
author | Cusano, Ellen Wong, Chelsea Taguedong, Eddy Vaska, Marcus Abedin, Tasnima Nixon, Nancy Karim, Safiya Tang, Patricia Heng, Daniel Y. C. Ezeife, Doreen |
author_facet | Cusano, Ellen Wong, Chelsea Taguedong, Eddy Vaska, Marcus Abedin, Tasnima Nixon, Nancy Karim, Safiya Tang, Patricia Heng, Daniel Y. C. Ezeife, Doreen |
author_sort | Cusano, Ellen |
collection | PubMed |
description | In the era of rapid development of new, expensive cancer therapies, value frameworks have been developed to quantify clinical benefit (CB). We assessed the evolution of CB since the 2015 introduction of The American Society of Clinical Oncology and The European Society of Medical Oncology value frameworks. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) assessing systemic therapies for solid malignancies from 2010 to 2020 were evaluated and CB (Δ) in 2010–2014 (pre-value frameworks (PRE)) were compared to 2015–2020 (POST) for overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), response rate (RR), and quality of life (QoL). In the 485 studies analyzed (12% PRE and 88% POST), the most common primary endpoint was PFS (49%), followed by OS (20%), RR (12%), and QoL (6%), with a significant increase in OS and decrease in RR as primary endpoints in the POST era (p = 0.011). Multivariable analyses revealed significant improvement in ΔOS POST (OR 2.86, 95% CI 0.46 to 5.26, p = 0.02) while controlling for other variables. After the development of value frameworks, median ΔOS improved minimally. The impact of value frameworks has yet to be fully realized in RCTs. Efforts to include endpoints shown to impact value, such as QoL, into clinical trials are warranted. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8628676 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-86286762021-11-30 Impact of Value Frameworks on the Magnitude of Clinical Benefit: Evaluating a Decade of Randomized Trials for Systemic Therapy in Solid Malignancies Cusano, Ellen Wong, Chelsea Taguedong, Eddy Vaska, Marcus Abedin, Tasnima Nixon, Nancy Karim, Safiya Tang, Patricia Heng, Daniel Y. C. Ezeife, Doreen Curr Oncol Article In the era of rapid development of new, expensive cancer therapies, value frameworks have been developed to quantify clinical benefit (CB). We assessed the evolution of CB since the 2015 introduction of The American Society of Clinical Oncology and The European Society of Medical Oncology value frameworks. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) assessing systemic therapies for solid malignancies from 2010 to 2020 were evaluated and CB (Δ) in 2010–2014 (pre-value frameworks (PRE)) were compared to 2015–2020 (POST) for overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), response rate (RR), and quality of life (QoL). In the 485 studies analyzed (12% PRE and 88% POST), the most common primary endpoint was PFS (49%), followed by OS (20%), RR (12%), and QoL (6%), with a significant increase in OS and decrease in RR as primary endpoints in the POST era (p = 0.011). Multivariable analyses revealed significant improvement in ΔOS POST (OR 2.86, 95% CI 0.46 to 5.26, p = 0.02) while controlling for other variables. After the development of value frameworks, median ΔOS improved minimally. The impact of value frameworks has yet to be fully realized in RCTs. Efforts to include endpoints shown to impact value, such as QoL, into clinical trials are warranted. MDPI 2021-11-21 /pmc/articles/PMC8628676/ /pubmed/34898590 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/curroncol28060412 Text en © 2021 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Cusano, Ellen Wong, Chelsea Taguedong, Eddy Vaska, Marcus Abedin, Tasnima Nixon, Nancy Karim, Safiya Tang, Patricia Heng, Daniel Y. C. Ezeife, Doreen Impact of Value Frameworks on the Magnitude of Clinical Benefit: Evaluating a Decade of Randomized Trials for Systemic Therapy in Solid Malignancies |
title | Impact of Value Frameworks on the Magnitude of Clinical Benefit: Evaluating a Decade of Randomized Trials for Systemic Therapy in Solid Malignancies |
title_full | Impact of Value Frameworks on the Magnitude of Clinical Benefit: Evaluating a Decade of Randomized Trials for Systemic Therapy in Solid Malignancies |
title_fullStr | Impact of Value Frameworks on the Magnitude of Clinical Benefit: Evaluating a Decade of Randomized Trials for Systemic Therapy in Solid Malignancies |
title_full_unstemmed | Impact of Value Frameworks on the Magnitude of Clinical Benefit: Evaluating a Decade of Randomized Trials for Systemic Therapy in Solid Malignancies |
title_short | Impact of Value Frameworks on the Magnitude of Clinical Benefit: Evaluating a Decade of Randomized Trials for Systemic Therapy in Solid Malignancies |
title_sort | impact of value frameworks on the magnitude of clinical benefit: evaluating a decade of randomized trials for systemic therapy in solid malignancies |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8628676/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34898590 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/curroncol28060412 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT cusanoellen impactofvalueframeworksonthemagnitudeofclinicalbenefitevaluatingadecadeofrandomizedtrialsforsystemictherapyinsolidmalignancies AT wongchelsea impactofvalueframeworksonthemagnitudeofclinicalbenefitevaluatingadecadeofrandomizedtrialsforsystemictherapyinsolidmalignancies AT taguedongeddy impactofvalueframeworksonthemagnitudeofclinicalbenefitevaluatingadecadeofrandomizedtrialsforsystemictherapyinsolidmalignancies AT vaskamarcus impactofvalueframeworksonthemagnitudeofclinicalbenefitevaluatingadecadeofrandomizedtrialsforsystemictherapyinsolidmalignancies AT abedintasnima impactofvalueframeworksonthemagnitudeofclinicalbenefitevaluatingadecadeofrandomizedtrialsforsystemictherapyinsolidmalignancies AT nixonnancy impactofvalueframeworksonthemagnitudeofclinicalbenefitevaluatingadecadeofrandomizedtrialsforsystemictherapyinsolidmalignancies AT karimsafiya impactofvalueframeworksonthemagnitudeofclinicalbenefitevaluatingadecadeofrandomizedtrialsforsystemictherapyinsolidmalignancies AT tangpatricia impactofvalueframeworksonthemagnitudeofclinicalbenefitevaluatingadecadeofrandomizedtrialsforsystemictherapyinsolidmalignancies AT hengdanielyc impactofvalueframeworksonthemagnitudeofclinicalbenefitevaluatingadecadeofrandomizedtrialsforsystemictherapyinsolidmalignancies AT ezeifedoreen impactofvalueframeworksonthemagnitudeofclinicalbenefitevaluatingadecadeofrandomizedtrialsforsystemictherapyinsolidmalignancies |