Dataset Information

Surrogate endpoints for overall survival in metastatic melanoma: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Recent phase 3 trials have shown an overall survival benefit in metastatic melanoma. We aimed to assess whether progression-free survival (PFS) could be regarded as a reliable surrogate for overall survival through a meta-analysis of randomised trials.

Methods

We systematically reviewed randomised trials comparing treatment regimens in metastatic melanoma that included dacarbazine as the control arm, and which reported both PFS and overall survival with a standard hazard ratio (HR). We correlated HRs for overall survival and PFS, weighted by sample size or by precision of the HR estimate, assuming fixed and random effects. We did sensitivity analyses according to presence of crossover, trial size, and dacarbazine dose.

Findings

After screening 1649 reports and meeting abstracts published before Sept 8, 2013, we identified 12 eligible randomised trials that enrolled 4416 patients with metastatic melanoma. Irrespective of weighting strategy, we noted a strong correlation between the treatment effects for PFS and overall survival, which seemed independent of treatment type. Pearson correlation coefficients were 0·71 (95% CI 0·29-0·90) with a random-effects assumption, 0·85 (0·59-0·95) with a fixed-effects assumption, and 0·89 (0·68-0·97) with sample-size weighting. For nine trials without crossover, the correlation coefficient was 0·96 (0·81-0·99), which decreased to 0·93 (0·74-0·98) when two additional trials with less than 50% crossover were included. Inclusion of mature follow-up data after at least 50% crossover (in vemurafenib and dabrafenib phase 3 trials) weakened the PFS to overall survival correlation (0·55, 0·03-0·84). Inclusion of trials with no or little crossover with the random-effects assumption yielded a conservative statement of the PFS to overall survival correlation of 0·85 (0·51-0·96).

Interpretation

PFS can be regarded as a robust surrogate for overall survival in dacarbazine-controlled randomised trials of metastatic melanoma; we postulate that this association will hold as treatment standards evolve and are adopted as the control arm in future trials.

Funding

None.

SUBMITTER: Flaherty KT

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4443445 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Surrogate endpoints for overall survival in metastatic melanoma: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

Flaherty Keith T KT Hennig Michael M Lee Sandra J SJ Ascierto Paolo A PA Dummer Reinhard R Eggermont Alexander M M AM Hauschild Axel A Kefford Richard R Kirkwood John M JM Long Georgina V GV Lorigan Paul P Mackensen Andreas A McArthur Grant G O'Day Steven S Patel Poulam M PM Robert Caroline C Schadendorf Dirk D

The Lancet. Oncology 20140131 3

<h4>Background</h4>Recent phase 3 trials have shown an overall survival benefit in metastatic melanoma. We aimed to assess whether progression-free survival (PFS) could be regarded as a reliable surrogate for overall survival through a meta-analysis of randomised trials.<h4>Methods</h4>We systematically reviewed randomised trials comparing treatment regimens in metastatic melanoma that included dacarbazine as the control arm, and which reported both PFS and overall survival with a standard hazar ...[more]

PMID: 24485879

Similar Datasets

Project description:Take Home Message Surrogate endpoints such as progression-free survival (PFS) and response rate (RR) are used commonly in metastatic urothelial cancer trials. We find that PFS is moderately correlated and RR is poorly correlated with overall survival. When possible, these endpoints should be de-emphasized. Background Surrogate endpoints (SEs), such as progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR), are frequently used in clinical trials. The relationship between SEs and overall survival (OS) has not been well described in metastatic urothelial cancer (MUC). Objective We evaluated trial-level data to assess the relationship between SEs and OS. We hypothesize a moderate surrogacy relationship between both PFS and ORR with OS. Design, setting, and participants We systematically reviewed phase 2/3 trials in MUC with two or more treatment arms, and report PFS and/or ORR, and OS. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis Linear regression was performed, and the coefficient of determination (R2) and surrogate threshold effect (STE) estimate were determined between PFS/ORR and OS. Results and limitations Of 3791 search results, 59 trials and 62 comparisons met the inclusion criteria. Of the 53 trials that reported PFS, 31 (58%) reported proportional hazard regression for PFS and OS. Linear regression across trials demonstrated an R2 of 0.60 between hazard ratio (HR) for PFS (HRPFS) and HR for OS (HROS), and an STE of 0.41. Linear regression of ΔPFS (median PFS in months of the treatment arm – that of the control arm) and ΔOS demonstrated an R2 of 0.12 and an STE of 14.1 mo. Thirty trials reported ORRs. Linear regression for ORRratio and HROS among all trials found an R2 of 0.08; an STE of 95% was not reached at any value and ΔORR and HROS similarly demonstrated a poor correlation with an R2 value of 0.03. Conclusions PFS provides only a moderate level of surrogacy for OS; An HRPFS of ≤0.41 provides 95% confidence of OS improvement. ORR is weakly correlated with OS and should be de-emphasized in MUC clinical trials. When PFS is discussed, proportional hazard regression should be reported. Patient summary We examined the relationship between surrogate endpoints, common outcomes in clinical trials, with survival in urothelial cancer trials. Progression-free survival is moderately correlated, while objective response rate had a poor correlation with survival and should be de-emphasized as a primary endpoint.

Project description:BackgroundOverall survival (OS) is the gold standard for the demonstration of a clinical benefit in cancer trials. Replacement of OS by a surrogate endpoint allows to reduce trial duration. To date, few surrogate endpoints have been validated in digestive oncology. The aim of this study was to draw up an ordered list of potential surrogate endpoints for OS in digestive cancer trials, by way of a survey among clinicians and methodologists. Secondary objective was to obtain their opinion on surrogacy and quality of life (QoL).MethodsIn 2007 and 2008, self administered sequential questionnaires were sent to a panel of French clinicians and methodologists involved in the conduct of cancer clinical trials. In the first questionnaire, panellists were asked to choose the most important characteristics defining a surrogate among six proposals, to give advantages and drawbacks of the surrogates, and to answer questions about their validation and use. Then they had to suggest potential surrogate endpoints for OS in each of the following tumour sites: oesophagus, stomach, liver, pancreas, biliary tract, lymphoma, colon, rectum, and anus. They finally gave their opinion on QoL as surrogate endpoint. In the second questionnaire, they had to classify the previously proposed candidate surrogates from the most (position #1) to the least relevant in their opinion.Frequency at which the endpoints were chosen as first, second or third most relevant surrogates was calculated and served as final ranking.ResultsResponse rate was 30% (24/80) in the first round and 20% (16/80) in the second one. Participants highlighted key points concerning surrogacy. In particular, they reminded that a surrogate endpoint is expected to predict clinical benefit in a well-defined therapeutic situation. Half of them thought it was not relevant to study QoL as surrogate for OS.DFS, in the neoadjuvant settings or early stages, and PFS, in the non operable or metastatic settings, were ranked first, with a frequency of more than 69% in 20 out of 22 settings. PFS was proposed in association with QoL in metastatic primary liver and stomach cancers (both 81%). This composite endpoint was ranked second in metastatic oesophageal (69%), colorectal (56%) and anal (56%) cancers, whereas QoL alone was also suggested in most metastatic situations.Other endpoints frequently suggested were R0 resection in the neoadjuvant settings (oesophagus (69%), stomach (56%), pancreas (75%) and biliary tract (63%)) and response. An unexpected endpoint was metastatic PFS in non operable oesophageal (31%) and pancreatic (44%) cancers. Quality and results of surgical procedures like sphincter preservation were also cited as eligible surrogate endpoints in rectal (19%) and anal (50% in case of localized disease) cancers. Except for alpha-FP kinetic in hepatocellular carcinoma (13%) and CA19-9 decline (6%) in pancreas, few endpoints based on biological or tumour markers were proposed.ConclusionThe overall results should help prioritise the endpoints to be statistically evaluated as surrogate for OS, so that trialists and clinicians can rely on endpoints that ensure relevant clinical benefit to the patient.

Dataset Information

Surrogate endpoints for overall survival in metastatic melanoma: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

Background

Methods

Findings

Interpretation

Funding

Publications

Surrogate endpoints for overall survival in metastatic melanoma: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets