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

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.

Therapeutic efficacy of specific immunotherapy for glioma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2018 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 443-461 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sara Hanaei ◽  
Khashayar Afshari ◽  
Armin Hirbod-Mobarakeh ◽  
Bahram Mohajer ◽  
Delara Amir Dastmalchi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Specific Immunotherapy ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Median Difference

Abstract Although different immunotherapeutic approaches have been developed for the treatment of glioma, there is a discrepancy between clinical trials limiting their approval as common treatment. So, the current systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to assess survival and clinical response of specific immunotherapy in patients with glioma. Generally, seven databases were searched to find eligible studies. Controlled clinical trials investigating the efficacy of specific immunotherapy in glioma were found eligible. After data extraction and risk of bias assessment, the data were analyzed based on the level of heterogeneity. Overall, 25 articles with 2964 patients were included. Generally, mean overall survival did not statistically improve in immunotherapy [median difference=1.51; 95% confidence interval (CI)=−0.16–3.17; p=0.08]; however, it was 11.16 months higher in passive immunotherapy (95% CI=5.69–16.64; p<0.0001). One-year overall survival was significantly higher in immunotherapy groups [hazard ratio (HR)=0.69; 95% CI=0.52–0.92; p=0.01]. As the hazard rate in the immunotherapy approach was 0.83 of the control group, 2-year overall survival was significantly higher in immunotherapy (HR=0.83; 95% CI=0.69–0.99; p=0.04). Three-year overall survival was significantly higher in immunotherapy as well (HR=0.67; 95% CI=0.48–0.92; p=0.01). Overall, median progression-free survival was significantly higher in immunotherapy (standard median difference=0.323; 95% CI=0.110–0.536; p=0.003). However, 1-year progression-free survival was not remarkably different between immunotherapy and control groups (HR=0.94; 95% CI=0.74–1.18; p=0.59). Specific immunotherapy demonstrated remarkable improvement in survival of patients with glioma and could be a considerable choice of treatment in the future. Despite the current promising results, further high-quality randomized controlled trials are required to approve immunotherapeutic approaches as the standard of care and the front-line treatment for glioma.

Clinical Experience with Azacitidine In Chronic Myelomonocytic Leukemia (CMML) in Spain

Blood ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 118 (21) ◽  
pp. 5040-5040
Author(s):  
Pablo Gonzalez Navarro ◽  
Regina García Delgado ◽  
Alicia Bailén Garcia ◽  
Juan Antonio Múñoz Múñoz
Keyword(s):  
Bone Marrow ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Clinical Experience ◽  
Peripheral Blood ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Chronic Myelomonocytic Leukemia ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Myelomonocytic Leukemia

Abstract Abstract 5040 Clinical Experience with Azacitidine In Chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML) in Spain Pablo González Navarro 1*, Regina García Delgado 2*, Alicia Bailén Garcia 3*, Juan Antonio Muñoz Muñoz 4* 1MD, PhD. Hospital San Cecilio, 18014 Granada, Spain, Teléfono: 958023600 [email protected]; 2Hospital Virgen De La Victoria, Málaga, Spain; 3Hospital Carlos Haya, Málaga, Spain; 4MD, PhD. Hospital Universitario Puerta del Mar, Cádiz, Spain Introduction: Chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML) is a clonal disorder of hematopoietic stem cells often occurring in elderly patients. In the new WHO classification, CMML has been reclassified as a myelodysplastic/myeloproliferative disease. CMML has been subdivided in two subclasses: CMML-1:<5% blasts in peripheral blood and 5–9% blasts in bone marrow, and CMML-2: <10% blasts in peripheral blood and 10–19% blasts in bone marrow (Greco et al. Mediterr J Hematol Infect Dis.2011). Azacitidine (AZA) is an hypomethylating agent approved in Europe for the treatment of myelodysplastic syndromes, with an intermediate to high risk of progressing to AML or death; chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML) and AML that has developed from a myelodysplastic syndrome (prescribing information EMEA 2011). Until its approval in May 2009, AZA was used in Spain under compassionate use in clinical trials. AZA produce a direct decrease of DNA methyltransferase activity, reverting aberrant DNA methylation and increasing the expression of silenced genes, leading to celular differentiation and/or apoptosis (Greco et al. Mediterr J Hematol Infect Dis. 2011). Materials and Methods: We report the results of a retrospective, longitudinal, multicenter Spanish study of 27 patients to assess the effectiveness of AZA to treat CMML. We present results of: Response, Overall Response, Overall Survival and Progression Free Survival. Results: Eighteen of the patients (69.23%) had Chronic Myelomonocytic Leukemia (CMML) type 1 and nine (30.77%) CMML type 2. Median age at diagnosis was 69 years. Male/female ratio: 19/8. ECOG performance status score 1–2 was 78%, twenty patients (74%) received an initial dose of 75 mg/m2 of AZA, whereas three patients (11%) received 50mg/ m2. The mean number of cycles received was 8.32, 95%IC (5.91; 10.73). Overall response to treatment was 53% (CR+PR+HI+mCR): 14.81% complete response, 7.4% partial response, 3,7% Medular complete response and 29,62% Hematological Improvement. In addition, 18,51% had stable disease. Thirty-six percent of patients were alive at the end of treatment with AZA. Median Overall Survival and Progression Free Survival were 17.47 months (95%CI 9.33, upper limit not reached) and 10.97 (95%IC 3.97, 17.47) respectively (Figure 1, 2). Conclusion: Our results show that AZA is an active drug in the treatment of patients with CMML, with similar response rates in the published literature. More data from this study and further investigation with different clinical trials are needed to confirm these outcomes as well as safety and effectiveness of this treatment. Disclosures: García Delgado: Celgene and Novartis: Speakers Bureau.

Clinical outcomes from a retrospective registry of patients with locally advanced/metastatic synovial sarcoma and myxoid round cell liposarcoma.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e22520-e22520
Author(s):  
Steven Attia ◽  
Seth Pollack ◽  
Brian Andrew Van Tine ◽  
Sant P. Chawla ◽  
Mihaela Druta ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Synovial Sarcoma ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Distant Metastasis ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Round Cell ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Line Chemotherapy

e22520 Background: Outcomes of patients (pts) with advanced synovial sarcoma (SS) and myxoid/round cell sarcoma (MRCL) is lacking. Current data is limited to single institution studies or post hoc analyses of clinical trials. To understand the natural history of these subtypes of soft tissue sarcoma we performed a systematic analysis of SS and MRCL patients from large medical institutions. Methods: Data was abstracted at 7 U.S. centers for pts treated from 2005 to 2015. Advanced SS or MRCL were eligible if they had received chemotherapy and were 18 years or older. The primary endpoint was overall survival, and secondary endpoints were progression free survival, time to next treatment, time to new distant metastasis. Results: 350 pts with locally advanced (LA), unresectable and/or or metastatic (Met) SS (n = 249) and MRCL (n = 101) were analyzed. The median age at diagnosis was 40 years for SS pts (58.2% male). The median age of MRCL pts was 50 years (67.3% male). 249 SS pts all had ≥ 1line of therapy, 74.7% had ≥2 lines of treatment. All MRCL pts received ≥1 line of treatment, 72.3% had ≥2 lines. The clinical outcomes (median overall survival (OS), progression free survival (PFS), time to next treatment (TTNT) and time to distant metastasis (TTDM)) from start of first-line chemotherapy are: The OS and PFS from second line chemotherapy decreased for all evaluable pts (n = 259) was 17.9 months (mos) [95% confidence interval (CI) (15.0, 22.3)]; 3.9 mos (3.4, 4.8), respectively. A similar trend toward shortened OS and PFS were seen with each subsequent line of chemotherapy. Conclusions: This registry analyzing real-world clinical outcomes among advanced SS and MRCL pts is the most comprehensive performed to date. It provides data on clinical outcomes depending on line of therapy and can provide the backbone for better patient management and design of future clinical trials.[Table: see text]

Correlation between overall response rate and progression-free survival/overall survival in comparative trials involving targeted therapies in molecularly enriched populations.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 3588-3588
Author(s):  
Benjamin J. Solomon ◽  
Herbert H. F. Loong ◽  
Yvonne J. Summers ◽  
Zachary M Thomas ◽  
Pearl Plernjit French ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Pearson Correlation ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Braf V600e ◽  
Targeted Agents ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Comparative Trials

3588 Background: Randomized trials involving agents targeting oncogene addicted tumors have greatly increased over the past decade. Whether clinical response rates can predict or correlate with efficacy measures such as progression-free survival (PFS) or overall survival (OS) has not been established in molecularly enriched patient populations. In this meta-analysis, we investigated whether improvements in objective response rate (ORR) in comparative trials using targeted agents could serve as a potential surrogate endpoint for improvements in PFS or OS in populations with oncogene addicted cancer. Methods: CT.gov and MEDLINE databases were queried (using commercial text mining software I2E) for randomized, phase 3 clinical trials based on the following prospectively defined criteria: (1) use of agents targeting EGFR activating mutations (erlotinib, gefitinib, afatinib, dacomitinib, osimertinib), ALK and ROS1 rearrangements (crizotinib, ceritinib, alectinib), BRAF V600E or V600K mutations (dabrafenib), and BCR-ABL fusion protein (imatinib, dasatinib, nilotinib, ponatinib); (2) must include molecularly enriched trial populations (biomarker subgroup data included if available); (3) control arms should not include targeted agents directed towards those molecularly enriched populations. ORR, OS, and PFS data were manually extracted from the relevant studies and correlative analyses (weighted Pearson correlation) were performed. Results: 61 trials were identified with 15 ultimately meeting the prespecified criteria. ORR effect size (both the ORR difference and log odds ratio) and the log PFS hazard ratio were strongly correlated (-0.78, p-value = 0.0007). No significant correlation was found between ORR and OS. Conclusions: In our analyses, a strong correlation between ORR and PFS was found in randomized clinical trials investigating agents targeting oncogene-driven cancers. Establishing a correlation between ORR and OS was limited, most probably due to confounding factors such as treatment cross-over following progression, number of subsequent therapies and long post-progression survival in this setting. These findings further warrant the use of ORR as a surrogate for PFS in biomarker-driven studies.

scholarly journals History of Diabetes and Survival Outcome Among Participants 65 Years or Older in SWOG Clinical Trials

2017 ◽  
pp. 1-12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dawn L. Hershman ◽  
Cathee Till ◽  
Jason D. Wright ◽  
Scott Ramsey ◽  
William E. Barlow ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Cox Regression ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Global Test ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Medicare Claims ◽  
Patients With Diabetes ◽  
Clinical Records

Purpose Diabetes is common, increases with age, and may affect outcomes among people with cancer. Understanding the association between diabetes and cancer outcome is challenging, because patients with diabetes have increased all-cause mortality compared with patients without diabetes. Methods We systematically examined the phase III trial database of SWOG to identify patients enrolled in trials during the period from 1999 to 2011. We linked the SWOG clinical records to Medicare claims data according to Social Security number, sex, and date of birth. Medicare claims were used to identify diabetes with at least 6 months of continuous Medicare coverage immediately before registration. Multivariable Cox regression was used to compare survival outcomes between patients with and without diabetes for each of 10 tumor cohorts. The primary outcome was overall survival. We also examined progression-free survival and cancer-free survival. Results In total, 6,422 patients from 15 trials were ≥ 65.5 years of age, of whom 3,173 patients (49%) met the criteria for linkage to Medicare claims. Thirty percent (n = 952) had claims for diabetes before registration. Patients with diabetes were more likely to be black ( P < .001), but no other differences in demographic characteristics were observed. In multivariable Cox regression, no association was found between baseline diabetes and overall or progression-free survival; in one case, patients with diabetes had marginally worse cancer-free survival (advanced non–small-cell lung cancer; P = .05). A global test found that baseline diabetes was associated with worse overall survival ( P = .03) across the entire panel of analyses. Conclusion Diabetes is common among elderly patients enrolled in clinical trials. Unlike prior observational studies, among patients treated with uniform treatment regimens, and controlling for known prognostic factors, we did not observe an association between diabetes and progression-free or cancer-free survival.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document