Cargando…
11 ESMO 2021 breakthroughs: practicing oncologist’s perceptions on data presentation
BACKGROUND: The European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) 2021 conference provided a high number of randomized phase III trial reports, many of which were claimed to be practice changing. Given the short time available for conference presentations, results and conclusions tend to have greatest pr...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elsevier
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8783088/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35051788 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.esmoop.2021.100376 |
_version_ | 1784638448053780480 |
---|---|
author | van Halteren, H.K. Tan, A. Pellegrino, B. Brasiuniene, B. Bennouna, J. Cunquero-Tomás, A.J. Strijbos, M. |
author_facet | van Halteren, H.K. Tan, A. Pellegrino, B. Brasiuniene, B. Bennouna, J. Cunquero-Tomás, A.J. Strijbos, M. |
author_sort | van Halteren, H.K. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) 2021 conference provided a high number of randomized phase III trial reports, many of which were claimed to be practice changing. Given the short time available for conference presentations, results and conclusions tend to have greatest priority with less time remaining for study background and study methodology. PURPOSE: On behalf of the ESMO Practicing Oncologists Working Group, 11 potentially practice-changing reports were selected and screened for three main questions: (i) Did the investigators provide sufficient details with regard to Patients and Methods to make the results comprehensible? (ii) Were there any reasons to consider bias? (iii) To which extent did the results presented translate to clinical benefit? RESULTS: In 2 out of 11 trials, the study design presented differed considerably from the study design described at ClinicalTrials.gov. Allocation concealment was not carried out in 6 out of 11 trials. In none of the trials reporting progression-free survival was informative censoring considered an issue. In none of the trials reporting overall survival was desirable crossover considered an issue. Defined trial outcome measures depicted at ClinicalTrials.gov, which could boost or weaken the ESMO-Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale score, were often lacking in the presentation. Study success was claimed in a heterogeneous manner, which was often not clearly linked to overall clinical benefit. CONCLUSION: ESMO conference presentations can inform the scientific community and catalyze further research but cannot replace the full papers in peer-reviewed journals, which are needed to estimate the thoroughness of the results, the overall impact on clinical benefit and the consequences for future treatment guidelines. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8783088 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Elsevier |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-87830882022-01-28 11 ESMO 2021 breakthroughs: practicing oncologist’s perceptions on data presentation van Halteren, H.K. Tan, A. Pellegrino, B. Brasiuniene, B. Bennouna, J. Cunquero-Tomás, A.J. Strijbos, M. ESMO Open Review BACKGROUND: The European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) 2021 conference provided a high number of randomized phase III trial reports, many of which were claimed to be practice changing. Given the short time available for conference presentations, results and conclusions tend to have greatest priority with less time remaining for study background and study methodology. PURPOSE: On behalf of the ESMO Practicing Oncologists Working Group, 11 potentially practice-changing reports were selected and screened for three main questions: (i) Did the investigators provide sufficient details with regard to Patients and Methods to make the results comprehensible? (ii) Were there any reasons to consider bias? (iii) To which extent did the results presented translate to clinical benefit? RESULTS: In 2 out of 11 trials, the study design presented differed considerably from the study design described at ClinicalTrials.gov. Allocation concealment was not carried out in 6 out of 11 trials. In none of the trials reporting progression-free survival was informative censoring considered an issue. In none of the trials reporting overall survival was desirable crossover considered an issue. Defined trial outcome measures depicted at ClinicalTrials.gov, which could boost or weaken the ESMO-Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale score, were often lacking in the presentation. Study success was claimed in a heterogeneous manner, which was often not clearly linked to overall clinical benefit. CONCLUSION: ESMO conference presentations can inform the scientific community and catalyze further research but cannot replace the full papers in peer-reviewed journals, which are needed to estimate the thoroughness of the results, the overall impact on clinical benefit and the consequences for future treatment guidelines. Elsevier 2022-01-17 /pmc/articles/PMC8783088/ /pubmed/35051788 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.esmoop.2021.100376 Text en © 2021 The Authors https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Review van Halteren, H.K. Tan, A. Pellegrino, B. Brasiuniene, B. Bennouna, J. Cunquero-Tomás, A.J. Strijbos, M. 11 ESMO 2021 breakthroughs: practicing oncologist’s perceptions on data presentation |
title | 11 ESMO 2021 breakthroughs: practicing oncologist’s perceptions on data presentation |
title_full | 11 ESMO 2021 breakthroughs: practicing oncologist’s perceptions on data presentation |
title_fullStr | 11 ESMO 2021 breakthroughs: practicing oncologist’s perceptions on data presentation |
title_full_unstemmed | 11 ESMO 2021 breakthroughs: practicing oncologist’s perceptions on data presentation |
title_short | 11 ESMO 2021 breakthroughs: practicing oncologist’s perceptions on data presentation |
title_sort | 11 esmo 2021 breakthroughs: practicing oncologist’s perceptions on data presentation |
topic | Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8783088/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35051788 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.esmoop.2021.100376 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT vanhalterenhk 11esmo2021breakthroughspracticingoncologistsperceptionsondatapresentation AT tana 11esmo2021breakthroughspracticingoncologistsperceptionsondatapresentation AT pellegrinob 11esmo2021breakthroughspracticingoncologistsperceptionsondatapresentation AT brasiunieneb 11esmo2021breakthroughspracticingoncologistsperceptionsondatapresentation AT bennounaj 11esmo2021breakthroughspracticingoncologistsperceptionsondatapresentation AT cunquerotomasaj 11esmo2021breakthroughspracticingoncologistsperceptionsondatapresentation AT strijbosm 11esmo2021breakthroughspracticingoncologistsperceptionsondatapresentation AT 11esmo2021breakthroughspracticingoncologistsperceptionsondatapresentation |