Dataset Information

Surrogacy of intermediate endpoints for overall survival in randomized controlled trials of first-line treatment for advanced soft tissue sarcoma in the pre- and post-pazopanib era: a meta-analytic evaluation.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Overall survival is the true endpoint for most randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of malignant tumors, whereas progression-free survival (PFS) is considered the most reliable surrogate endpoint for overall survival (OS). The present study aimed to evaluate the correlation between surrogate endpoints and OS in randomized trials of first-line chemotherapy with doxorubicin (DOX), the standard treatment for advanced and metastatic soft tissue sarcomas (ASTS), using a meta-analytic approach.

Methods

In a systematic review, we identified RCTs of first-line chemotherapy for ASTS that compared single-agent doxorubicin (DOX) with other chemotherapy regimens, and were published in English during January 1974-December 2017. A meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the efficacy of first-line treatments for ASTS. Surrogacy of the intermediate endpoints for OS was investigated using weighted linear regression analysis. Correlation strength was examined using the coefficient of determination (R²).

Results

Twenty-seven randomized trials, comprising 6156 patients (3371 patients in the experimental arm and 2785 patients in the DOX arm) were identified. The hazard ratios for OS and PFS showed that the efficacy of treatment for ASTS was not significantly different between standard DOX and experimental treatments. The median OS was significantly prolonged in RCTs published after 2012 when pazopanib was approved for treating ASTS. The median PFS, however, did not differ significantly. The correlation between PFS and OS was moderate (R²?=?0.557), but better than that between OS and 3-month PFS, 6-month PFS, and response rate (R²?=?0.200, 0.073, and 0.278, respectively). The correlation between PFS and OS tended to be more favorable in RCTs published after 2012 (R²?=?0.586 and 0.459, respectively).

Conclusions

The trial-level correlation between PFS and OS was only modest; it tended to be better in RCTs published after 2012. While the effective lines of chemotherapy and the introduction of new drugs prolonged OS but not PFS, PFS is a better surrogate than other intermediate endpoints in the first-line ASTS trials even in the post-pazopanib era. Although this does not negate the need for more reliable surrogate endpoints for OS.

SUBMITTER: Tanaka K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6330427 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Surrogacy of intermediate endpoints for overall survival in randomized controlled trials of first-line treatment for advanced soft tissue sarcoma in the pre- and post-pazopanib era: a meta-analytic evaluation.

Tanaka Kazuhiro K Kawano Masanori M Iwasaki Tatsuya T Itonaga Ichiro I Tsumura Hiroshi H

BMC cancer 20190111 1

<h4>Background</h4>Overall survival is the true endpoint for most randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of malignant tumors, whereas progression-free survival (PFS) is considered the most reliable surrogate endpoint for overall survival (OS). The present study aimed to evaluate the correlation between surrogate endpoints and OS in randomized trials of first-line chemotherapy with doxorubicin (DOX), the standard treatment for advanced and metastatic soft tissue sarcomas (ASTS), using a meta-analyti ...[more]

PMID: 30634944

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe international Intermediate Clinical Endpoints in Cancer of the Prostate working group has established metastasis-free survival as a surrogate for overall survival in localised prostate cancer based on the findings of 19 predominantly radiotherapy-based trials. We sought to comprehensively assess aggregate trial-level performance of commonly reported intermediate clinical endpoints across all randomised trials in localised prostate cancer.MethodsFor this meta-analysis, we searched PubMed for all trials in localised or biochemically recurrent prostate cancer published between Jan 1, 1970, and Jan 15, 2020. Eligible trials had to be randomised, therapeutic, reporting overall survival and at least one intermediate clinical endpoint, and with a sample size of at least 70 participants. Trials of metastatic disease were excluded. Intermediate clinical endpoints included biochemical failure, local failure, distant metastases, biochemical failure-free survival, progression-free survival, and metastasis-free survival. Candidacy for surrogacy was assessed using the second condition of the meta-analytical approach (ie, correlation of the treatment effect of the intermediate clinical endpoint and overall survival), using R2 weighted by the inverse variance of the log intermediate clinical endpoint hazard ratio. The intermediate clinical endpoint was deemed to be a surrogate for overall survival if R2 was 0·7 or greater.Findings75 trials (53 631 patients) were included in our analysis. Median follow-up was 9·1 years (IQR 5·7-10·6). Biochemical failure (R2 0·38 [95% CI 0·11-0·64]), biochemical failure-free survival (R2 0·12 [0·0030-0·33]), biochemical failure and clinical failure (R2 0·28 [0·0045-0·65]), and local failure (R2 0·085 [0·00-0·37]) correlated poorly with overall survival. Progression-free survival (R2 0·46 [95% CI 0·22-0·67]) showed moderate correlation with overall survival, and metastasis-free survival (R2 0·78 [0·59-0·89]) correlated strongly.InterpretationIntermediate clinical endpoints based on biochemical and local failure did not meet the second condition of the meta-analytical approach and are not surrogate endpoints for overall survival in localised prostate cancer. Our findings validate metastasis-free survival as the only identified surrogate endpoint for overall survival to date.FundingProstate Cancer Foundation and National Institutes of Health.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Alveolar soft part sarcoma (ASPS) is an exceedingly rare and orphan disease, without active drugs approved in the front line. Pazopanib and trabectedin are licensed for sarcoma treatment from second-line, but very little and contradictory data are available on their activity in ASPS. Lacking ongoing and/or planned clinical trials, we conducted a multi-institutional study involving the reference sites for sarcoma in Europe, U.S., and Japan, within the World Sarcoma Network, to investigate the efficacy of pazopanib and trabectedin. MATERIALS AND METHODS:From May 2007, 14 of the 27 centers that were asked to retrospectively review their databases had identified 44 advanced ASPS patients treated with pazopanib and/or trabectedin. Response was evaluated by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors 1.1. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were computed by Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS:Among 30 patients who received pazopanib, 18 were pretreated (13 with other antiangiogenics). Response was evaluable in 29/30 patients. Best responses were 1 complete response, 7 partial response (PR), 17 stable disease (SD), and 4 progressions. At a 19-month median follow-up, median PFS was 13.6 months (range: 1.6-32.2+), with 59% of patients progression-free at 1 year. Median OS was not reached.Among 23 patients treated with trabectedin, all were pretreated and evaluable for response. Best responses were 1 PR, 13 SD, and 9 progressions. At a 27-month median follow-up, median PFS was 3.7 months (range: 0.7-109), with 13% of patients progression-free at 1 year. Median OS was 9.1 months. CONCLUSION:The value of pazopanib in advanced ASPS is confirmed, with durable responses, whereas the value of trabectedin appears limited. These results are relevant to defining the best approach to advanced ASPS. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE:This retrospective study, conducted among the world reference centers for treatment of sarcoma, confirms the value of pazopanib in patients with advanced alveolar soft part sarcoma (ASPS), with dimensional and durable responses, whereas trabectedin shows a limited activity. Alveolar soft part sarcoma is resistant to conventional cytotoxic chemotherapy. Pazopanib and trabectedin are licensed for treatment of sarcoma from second line; in the lack of prospective clinical trials, these results are relevant to defining ASPS best management and strongly support initiatives aimed at obtaining the approval of pazopanib in the front line of the disease.

Project description:Because of the time and expense required to obtain clinical outcomes of interest, such as functional limitations or death, clinical trials often focus the effects of treatment on earlier and more easily obtained surrogate markers. Preliminary work to define surrogates focused on the fraction of a treatment effect "explained" by a marker in a regression model, but as notions of causality have been formalized in the statistical setting, formal definitions of high-quality surrogate markers have been developed in the causal inference framework, using either the "causal effect" or "causal association" settings. In the causal effect setting, high-quality surrogate markers have a large fraction of the total treatment effect explained by the effect of the treatment on the marker net of the treatment on the outcome. In the causal association setting, high-quality surrogate markers have large treatment effects on the outcome when there are large treatment effects on the marker, and small effects on the outcome when there are small effects on the marker. A particularly important feature of a surrogate marker is that the direction of a treatment effect be the same for both the marker and the outcome. Settings in which the marker and outcome are positively associated but the marker and outcome have beneficial and harmful or harmful and beneficial treatment effects, respectively, have been referred to as "surrogate paradoxes". If this outcome always occurs, it is not problematic; however, as correlations among the outcome, marker, and their treatment effects weaken, it may occur for some trials and not for others, leading to potentially incorrect conclusions, and real-life examples that shortened thousands of lives are unfortunately available. We propose measures for assessing the risk of the surrogate paradox using the meta-analytic causal association framework, which allows us to focus on the probability that a given treatment will yield treatment effect in different directions between the marker and the outcome, and to determine the size of a beneficial effect of the treatment on the marker required to minimize the risk of a harmful effect of the treatment on the outcome. We provide simulations and consider two applications.

Dataset Information

Surrogacy of intermediate endpoints for overall survival in randomized controlled trials of first-line treatment for advanced soft tissue sarcoma in the pre- and post-pazopanib era: a meta-analytic evaluation.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Surrogacy of intermediate endpoints for overall survival in randomized controlled trials of first-line treatment for advanced soft tissue sarcoma in the pre- and post-pazopanib era: a meta-analytic evaluation.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets