Testing of evaluation bias for progression free survival endpoint in oncology clinical trials

2016 ◽  
Vol 35 (22) ◽  
pp. 3923-3932
Author(s):  
Yan Sun ◽  
Wenting Wu ◽  
Daniel Sargent
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Evaluation Bias ◽  
Oncology Clinical Trials ◽  
Survival Endpoint

scholarly journals Indicadores (Outcomes) Primários e Secundários em Ensaios Clínicos Oncológicos: Definição e Usos

2014 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 498
Author(s):  
António Vaz-Carneiro ◽  
Ricardo Da Luz ◽  
Margarida Borges ◽  
João Costa
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Methodological Issue ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Disease Free Survival ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Oncology Clinical Trials ◽  
Alternative Drug ◽  
Selection Of

<strong>Introduction:</strong> The proof of efficacy from a therapeutic intervention in oncology must be defined through well conducted clinical trials. One of the most important methodological issue is the outcome selection needed to calculate measures of association allowing definition of clinical efficacy.<br /><strong>Material and Methods:</strong> We designed a narrative revision based on some of the international regulatory instructions from drug agencies, as well as consensus papers from scientific oncology societies, listing and critically assessing each outcome used in oncology clinical trials.<br /><strong>Results:</strong> We identified as being the most important outcomes in oncology trials the overall survival, the progression free survival/ disease-free survival, the toxicity, the quality of life/patient- reported outcomes and the objective response rate.<br /><strong>Discussion:</strong> The selection of the primary outcome must be based on therapeutic efficacy as well as toxicity, expected survival, alternative drug regimens and even disease prevalence.<br /><strong>Conclusion:</strong> The selection of efficacy outcomes for clinical trials in oncology is very important and its selection must be well justified, and depends on the type of disease, the patients and the drug being studied.<br /><strong>Keywords:</strong> Clinical Trials as Topic; Neoplasms; Medical Oncology; Treatment Outcome.

scholarly journals Overall Survival Versus Progression-Free Survival in Oncology Clinical Trials

2016 ◽  
Vol 19 (7) ◽  
pp. A717 ◽  
Author(s):  
A Aissaoui ◽  
A Bin Sawad ◽  
F Turkistani ◽  
N Aissaoui
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Oncology Clinical Trials

The role of obinutuzumab in the management of follicular lymphoma

2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (31) ◽  
pp. 3565-3578 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jenny O’Nions ◽  
William Townsend
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Follicular Lymphoma ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Cd20 Antibody ◽  
Anti Cd20 ◽  
Almost All ◽  
Cd20 Antibodies

The outcomes for follicular lymphoma (FL) have improved significantly in recent years. This has been driven by an improved understanding of the pathobiology of FL and the development of therapeutic anti-CD20 antibodies. Combining rituximab with chemotherapy, coupled with its use as maintenance therapy, has contributed to significant improvements in disease control and progression-free survival. However, FL remains incurable and almost all patients invariably relapse. Therefore, there remains a need to develop novel therapeutic options and optimize existing regimens. Obinutuzumab (a first-in-class, glycoengineered, humanized type 2 anti-CD20 antibody) has been evaluated in a number of clinical trials. In this review, we will summarize the evaluable results of clinical trials investigating the efficacy of obinutuzumab in the treatment of FL.

scholarly journals Blinded Independent Central Review of Progression-Free Survival in Phase III Clinical Trials: Important Design Element or Unnecessary Expense?

2008 ◽  
Vol 26 (22) ◽  
pp. 3791-3796 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lori E. Dodd ◽  
Edward L. Korn ◽  
Boris Freidlin ◽  
C. Carl Jaffe ◽  
Lawrence V. Rubinstein ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Treatment Effectiveness ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Informative Censoring ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
General Strategy ◽  
Design Element ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Using Data

Progression-free survival is an important end point in advanced disease settings. Blinded independent central review (BICR) of progression in randomized clinical trials has been advocated to control bias that might result from errors in progression assessments. However, although BICR lessens some potential biases, it does not remove all biases from evaluations of treatment effectiveness. In fact, as typically conducted, BICRs may introduce bias because of informative censoring, which results from having to censor unconfirmed locally determined progressions. In this article, we discuss the rationale for BICR and different ways of implementing independent review. We discuss the limitations of these approaches and review published trials that report implementing BICR. We demonstrate the existence of informative censoring using data from a randomized phase II trial. We conclude that double-blinded trials with consistent application of measurement criteria are the best means of ensuring unbiased trial results. When such designs are not practical, BICR is not recommended as a general strategy for reducing bias. However, BICR may be useful as an auditing tool to assess the reliability of marginally positive results.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document