Missing Data and Measurement Variability in Assessing Progression-Free Survival Endpoint in Randomized Clinical Trials

被引:32
|
作者
Sridhara, Rajeshwari [1 ]
Mandrekar, Sumithra J. [3 ]
Dodd, Lori E. [2 ]
机构
[1] US FDA, CDER OTS OB DBV, Silver Spring, MD 20993 USA
[2] NIAID, Biostat Res Branch, NIH, Bethesda, MD 20892 USA
[3] Mayo Clin, Div Biomed Stat & Informat, Rochester, MN USA
关键词
TUMOR PROGRESSION; ONCOLOGY; CANCER; METAANALYSIS;
D O I
10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-12-2938
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Progression-free survival (PFS) is frequently used as the primary efficacy endpoint in the evaluation of cancer treatment that is considered for marketing approval. Missing or incomplete data problems become more acute with a PFS endpoint (compared with overall survival). In a given clinical trial, it is common to observe incomplete data due to premature treatment discontinuation, missed or flawed assessments, change of treatment, lack of follow-up, and unevaluable data. When incomplete data issues are substantial, interpretation of the data becomes tenuous. Plans to prevent, minimize, or properly analyze incomplete data are critical for generalizability of results from the clinical trial. Variability in progressive disease measurement between radiologists further contributes to data problems with a PFS endpoint. The repercussions of this on phase III clinical trials are complex and depend on several factors, including the magnitude of the variability and whether there is a systematic reader evaluation bias favoring one treatment arm particularly in open-label trials. (C) 2013 AACR.
引用
收藏
页码:2613 / 2620
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Missing Data and Censoring in the Analysis of Progression-Free Survival in Oncology Clinical Trials
    Denne, J. S.
    Stone, A. M.
    Bailey-Iacona, R.
    Chen, T. -T.
    JOURNAL OF BIOPHARMACEUTICAL STATISTICS, 2013, 23 (05) : 951 - 970
  • [2] Overview: Progression-Free Survival as an Endpoint in Clinical Trials with Solid Tumors
    Korn, Ronald L.
    Crowley, John J.
    CLINICAL CANCER RESEARCH, 2013, 19 (10) : 2607 - 2612
  • [3] Progression-free survival as a primary endpoint in clinical trials of metastatic colorectal cancer
    Gill, S.
    Berry, S.
    Biagi, J.
    Butts, C.
    Buyse, M.
    Chen, E.
    Jonker, D.
    Marginean, C.
    Samson, B.
    Stewart, J.
    Thirlwell, M.
    Wong, R.
    Maroun, J. A.
    CURRENT ONCOLOGY, 2011, 18 : S5 - S10
  • [4] Progression-free survival landmark analysis: a critical endpoint in melanoma clinical trials
    Ascierto, Paolo A.
    Long, Georgina V.
    LANCET ONCOLOGY, 2016, 17 (08): : 1037 - 1039
  • [5] Progression-free survival as a surrogate endpoint in myeloma clinical trials: an evolving paradigm
    Pawlyn, Charlotte
    Schjesvold, Fredrik H.
    Cairns, David A.
    Wei, L. J.
    Davies, Faith
    Nadeem, Omar
    Abdulhaq, Haifaa
    Mateos, Maria-Victoria
    Laubach, Jacob
    Weisel, Katja
    Ludwig, Heinz
    Rajkumar, S. Vincent
    Sonneveld, Pieter
    Jackson, Graham
    Morgan, Gareth
    Richardson, Paul G.
    BLOOD CANCER JOURNAL, 2024, 14 (01):
  • [7] THE VALUE OF PROGRESSION-FREE SURVIVAL (PFS) AS AN ENDPOINT IN ONCOLOGY TRIALS
    Quinn, C.
    Palmer, S.
    Bruns, J.
    Grant, C.
    Sykes, D.
    Kaura, S.
    VALUE IN HEALTH, 2015, 18 (07) : A684 - A685
  • [8] Use of progression-free survival as a valid endpoint in phase II cancer clinical trials
    Maurie Markman
    Current Oncology Reports, 2007, 9 (3) : 159 - 160
  • [9] Progression-free survival as an endpoint for clinical trials in first-line metastatic urothelial cancer
    Galsky, Matt D.
    Krege, Susanne
    Lin, Chia-Chin
    Hahn, Noah M.
    Ecke, Thorsten
    Moshier, Erin L.
    Sonpavde, Guru
    Godbold, James H.
    Oh, William K.
    Bamias, Aristotelis
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2013, 31 (06)
  • [10] Progression-free survival is an adequate endpoint for clinical trials of locally advanced and metastatic urothelial carcinoma
    Martini, Alberto
    Fallara, Giuseppe
    Ploussard, Guillaume
    Pradere, Benjamin
    CURRENT OPINION IN UROLOGY, 2022, 32 (05) : 500 - 503