Dataset Information

Attrition in NRG Oncology's Radiation-Based Clinical Trials.

ABSTRACT: PURPOSE:To determine individual, organizational, and protocol-specific factors associated with attrition in NRG Oncology's radiation-based clinical trials. METHODS AND MATERIALS:This retrospective analysis included 27,443 patients representing 134 NRG Oncology's radiation-based clinical trials .trials with primary efficacy results published from 1985-2011. Trials were separated on the basis of the primary endpoint (fixed time vs event driven). The cumulative incidence approach was used to estimate time to attrition, and cause-specific Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess factors associated with attrition. RESULTS:Most patients (69%) were enrolled in an event-driven trial (n = 18,809), while 31% were enrolled in a fixed-time trial (n = 8634). Median follow-up time for patients enrolled in fixed-time trials was 4.1 months and 37.2 months for patients enrolled in event-driven trials. Fixed time trials with a duration < 6 months had a 5 month attrition rate of 4.3% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.4%, 5.5%) and those with a duration ? 6 months had a 1 year attrition rate of 1.6% (95% CI: 1.2, 2.1). Event-driven trials had 1- and 5-year attrition rates of 0.5% (95% CI: 0.4%, 0.6%) and 13.6% (95% CI: 13.1%, 14.1%), respectively. Younger age, female gender, and Zubrod performance status >0 were associated with greater attrition as were enrollment by institutions in the West and South regions and participation in fixed-time trials. CONCLUSIONS:Attrition in clinical trials can have a negative effect on trial outcomes. Data on factors associated with attrition can help guide the development of strategies to enhance retention. These strategies should focus on patient characteristics associated with attrition in both fixed-time and event-driven trials as well as in differing geographic regions of the country.

SUBMITTER: Ulrich CM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6339529 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Attrition in NRG Oncology's Radiation-Based Clinical Trials.

Ulrich Connie M CM Deshmukh Snehal S Pugh Stephanie L SL Hanlon Alexandra A Grady Christine C Watkins Bruner Deborah D Curran Walter W

International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics 20180510 1

<h4>Purpose</h4>To determine individual, organizational, and protocol-specific factors associated with attrition in NRG Oncology's radiation-based clinical trials.<h4>Methods and materials</h4>This retrospective analysis included 27,443 patients representing 134 NRG Oncology's radiation-based clinical trials .trials with primary efficacy results published from 1985-2011. Trials were separated on the basis of the primary endpoint (fixed time vs event driven). The cumulative incidence approach was ...[more]

PMID: 29908786

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceThe American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) and the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) have independently published value frameworks. To date, whether the clinical benefit scoring algorithms from these framework were intended to measure absolute or relative survival benefit remains unclear.ObjectiveTo empirically examine the measurement characteristics of these frameworks by comparing their survival efficacy components (ASCO clinical benefit score [CBS] and ESMO preliminary magnitude of clinical benefit grade [PMCBG]) with established measures of absolute (median survival difference and restricted mean survival time [RMST] difference) and relative (hazard ratios [HRs]) survival benefit.Data sourcesThe US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)'s Hematology and Oncology Approvals and Safety Notifications database was retrospectively reviewed to identify phase 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) cited for clinical efficacy evidence in oncology drug approvals from January 1, 2006, through December 31, 2017.Study selectionTwo reviewers searched the database for initial trials cited for approval. Phase 3 trials with overall survival, progression-free survival, and/or time to progression as their primary or coprimary end points were included. Notifications for noncancer indications or presenting label changes and trials that did not report HRs for the required end points and/or did not publish survival curves with number-at-risk data were excluded. Of 269 notifications initially identified, 107 met the selection criteria.Data extraction and synthesisSensitivity analyses were conducted by calculating the scores using (1) the framework-defined end point, including tail-of-curve bonus points (ASCO) or long-term plateau adjustments (ESMO) (framework-defined end point plus tail-of-curve bonus), (2) overall survival data only, and (3) progression-free survival data only. For primary and sensitivity analyses, Spearman correlation coefficients were calculated to examine the relationships between (1) ASCO-CBS or ESMO-PMCBG and RMST difference, (2) ASCO-CBS or ESMO-PMCBG and median survival difference, and (3) ASCO-CBS or ESMO-PMCBG and HR. Data were analyzed from January 7 through April 30, 2018.Main outcomes and measuresIn the primary analysis, ASCO-CBSs and ESMO-PMCBGs were calculated for the included trials using the framework-defined end point.ResultsCompared with measures of absolute survival benefit, ESMO-PMCBGs showed low to moderate correlations with RMST difference (ρ = 0.44) and moderate to high correlations with median survival difference (ρ = 0.64). ASCO-CBSs showed low to moderate correlations with both measures of absolute benefit (ρ = 0.43 for RMST difference; ρ = 0.44 for median survival). Compared with a relative measure of survival (HRs), ESMO-PMCBGs showed a low correlation (ρ = 0.47) and ASCO-CBSs showed a higher correlation (ρ = 0.76).Conclusions and relevanceNeither framework consistently performed as an absolute measure of survival benefit. The incorporation of a direct measure of absolute clinical benefit, such as RMST difference, into the survival efficacy components of their algorithms should be considered.

Project description:ImportanceFor many types of epithelial malignant neoplasms that are treated with definitive radiotherapy (RT), treatment prolongation and interruptions have an adverse effect on outcomes.ObjectiveTo analyze the association between RT duration and outcomes in patients with esophageal cancer who were treated with definitive chemoradiotherapy (CRT).Design, setting, and participantsThis study was an unplanned, post hoc secondary analysis of 3 prospective, multi-institutional phase 3 randomized clinical trials (Radiation Therapy Oncology Group [RTOG] 8501, RTOG 9405, and RTOG 0436) of the National Cancer Institute-sponsored NRG Oncology (formerly the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project, RTOG, and Gynecologic Oncology Group). Enrolled patients with nonmetastatic esophageal cancer underwent definitive CRT in the trials between 1986 and 2013, with follow-up occurring through 2014. Data analyses were conducted between March 2022 to February 2023.ExposuresTreatment groups in the trials used standard-dose RT (50 Gy) and concurrent chemotherapy.Main outcomes and measuresThe outcomes were local-regional failure (LRF), distant failure, disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS). Multivariable models were used to examine the associations between these outcomes and both RT duration and interruptions. Radiotherapy duration was analyzed as a dichotomized variable using an X-Tile software to choose a cut point and its median value as a cut point, as well as a continuous variable.ResultsThe analysis included 509 patients (median [IQR] age, 64 [57-70] years; 418 males [82%]; and 376 White individuals [74%]). The median (IQR) follow-up was 4.01 (2.93-4.92) years for surviving patients. The median cut point of RT duration was 39 days or less in 271 patients (53%) vs more than 39 days in 238 patients (47%), and the X-Tile software cut point was 45 days or less in 446 patients (88%) vs more than 45 days in 63 patients (12%). Radiotherapy interruptions occurred in 207 patients (41%). Female (vs male) sex and other (vs White) race and ethnicity were associated with longer RT duration and RT interruptions. In the multivariable models, RT duration longer than 45 days was associated with inferior DFS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.34; 95% CI, 1.01-1.77; P = .04). The HR for OS was 1.33, but the results were not statistically significant (95% CI, 0.99-1.77; P = .05). Radiotherapy duration longer than 39 days (vs ≤39 days) was associated with a higher risk of LRF (HR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.06-1.65; P = .01). As a continuous variable, RT duration (per 1 week increase) was associated with DFS failure (HR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.01-1.28; P = .03). The HR for LRF 1.13, but the result was not statistically significant (95% CI, 0.99-1.28; P = .07).Conclusions and relevanceResults of this study indicated that in patients with esophageal cancer receiving definitive CRT, prolonged RT duration was associated with inferior outcomes; female patients and those with other (vs White) race and ethnicity were more likely to have longer RT duration and experience RT interruptions. Radiotherapy interruptions should be minimized to optimize outcomes.

Project description:PURPOSE:To validate whether prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level after neoadjuvant androgen suppression (neoAS) is associated with long-term outcome after neoAS and external beam radiation therapy (RT) with concurrent short-term androgen suppression (AS) in patients with prostate cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS:This study included 2404 patients. The patients were treated with neoAS before RT and concurrent AS (without post-RT AS) and were pooled from NRG Oncology/RTOG trials 9202, 9408, 9413, and 9910. Multivariable models were used to test associations between the prespecified dichotomized post-neoAS, pre-RT PSA level (?0.1 vs >0.1 ng/mL) groupings, and clinical outcomes. RESULTS:The median follow-up for surviving patients was 9.4 years. The median post-neoAS, pre-RT PSA level was 0.3 ng/mL, with 32% of patients having levels ?0.1 ng/mL. Race, Gleason score, tumor stage, node stage, pretreatment PSA level, and duration of neoAS were associated with the groups of patients with PSA levels ?0.1 and >0.1 ng/mL. In univariate analyses, post-neoAS, pre-RT PSA level >0.1 ng/mL was associated with increased risks of biochemical failure (hazard ratio [HR], 2.04; P < .0001); local failure (HR, 2.51; P < .0001); distant metastases (HR, 1.73; P = .0006); cause-specific mortality (HR, 2.36; P < .0001); and all-cause mortality (HR, 1.24; P = .005). In multivariable models that also included baseline and treatment variables, post-neoAS, pre-RT PSA level >0.1 ng/mL was independently associated with increased risk of biochemical failure (HR, 2.00; P < .0001); local failure (HR, 2.33; P < .0001); and cause-specific mortality (HR, 1.75; P = .03). CONCLUSIONS:Patients with a PSA level >0.1 ng/mL after neoAS and before the start of RT had less favorable clinical outcomes than patients whose PSA level was ?0.1 ng/mL. The role of post-neoAS, pre-RT PSA level relative to PSA levels obtained along the continuum of medical care is not presently defined but could be tested in future clinical trials.

Project description:PurposeThe registration of multiple imaging studies to radiation therapy computed tomography simulation, including magnetic resonance imaging, positron emission tomography-computed tomography, etc. is a widely used strategy in radiation oncology treatment planning, and these registrations have valuable roles in image guidance, dose composition/accumulation, and treatment delivery adaptation. The NRG Oncology Medical Physics subcommittee formed a working group to investigate feasible workflows for a self-study credentialing process of image registration commissioning.Methods and materialsThe American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) Task Group 132 (TG132) report on the use of image registration and fusion algorithms in radiation therapy provides basic guidelines for quality assurance and quality control of the image registration algorithms and the overall clinical process. The report recommends a series of tests and the corresponding metrics that should be evaluated and reported during commissioning and routine quality assurance, as well as a set of recommendations for vendors. The NRG Oncology medical physics subcommittee working group found incompatibility of some digital phantoms with commercial systems. Thus, there is still a need to provide further recommendations in terms of compatible digital phantoms, clinical feasible workflow, and achievable thresholds, especially for future clinical trials involving deformable image registration algorithms. Nine institutions participated and evaluated 4 commonly used commercial imaging registration software and various versions in the field of radiation oncology.Results and conclusionsThe NRG Oncology Working Group on image registration commissioning herein provides recommendations on the use of digital phantom/data sets and analytical software access for institutions and clinics to perform their own self-study evaluation of commercial imaging systems that might be employed for coregistration in radiation therapy treatment planning and image guidance procedures. Evaluation metrics and their corresponding values were given as guidelines to establish practical tolerances. Vendor compliance for image registration commissioning was evaluated, and recommendations were given for future development.

Dataset Information

Attrition in NRG Oncology's Radiation-Based Clinical Trials.

Publications

Attrition in NRG Oncology's Radiation-Based Clinical Trials.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets