Trends in endpoint selection and result interpretation in advanced non-small cell lung cancer clinical trials published between 2000 and 2012: A retrospective cohort study
Metadatos
Mostrar el registro completo del ítemAutor
Fernández López, Cristina; Calleja Hernández, Miguel Ángel; Espín Balbino, Jaime; Cabeza Barrera, José; Expósito Hernández, JoséEditorial
Wiley
Materia
Non-small-cell lung cancer Outcome assessment (health care) Quality of life Retrospective study Survival analysis (Biometry)
Fecha
2019Referencia bibliográfica
Fernández‐López, C., Calleja‐Hernández, M. Á., Balbino, J. E., Cabeza‐Barrera, J., & Expósito‐Hernández, J. (2019). Trends in endpoint selection and result interpretation in advanced non‐small cell lung cancer clinical trials published between 2000 and 2012: A retrospective cohort study. Thoracic cancer, 10(4), 904-908.
Resumen
Background: The objective of this review was to investigate trends in clinical
trial design, specifically, the primary outcomes used, interpretation of results, and
the magnitude of the benefits described in phase III controlled clinical trials in
the first-line treatment of patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer
(NSCLC).
Methods: Seventy-six trials published between 2000 and 2012 were selected from
a total of 122 identified in a structured search.
Results: Overall survival (OS) was evaluated as the primary study endpoint in
50 (65.8%) trials, followed by progression-free survival (PFS) in 15 (19.7%), and
other variables, such as toxicity, quality of life (QoL), and response rate in
11 (14.5%). Ten (66.7%) out of 15 clinical trials using PFS as the primary endpoint
were published between 2010 and 2012. Median overall survival (mOS)
was 9.90 months (interquartile range: 3.5) with an increase of 0.384 months per
year of publication (P < 0.001). A statistically significant improvement in mOS
was obtained in only 13 (18.8%) trials. A total of 41 (53.9%) studies concluded
that the result was positive. Of these, only 16 (39.1%) showed a statistically significant
benefit in OS. QoL was assessed in 46 trials (60.5%) and of these,
10 (21.7%) reported significant improvements.
Conclusions: These findings raise important questions about how clinical benefits
are measured in clinical trials in advanced NSCLC. Appropriate clinically relevant
outcome variables should be established and validated, and post-marketing
studies should be requested by regulatory authorities to ensure meaningful clinical
benefits in OS and QoL.