Time-to-event surrogate end-points in multiple myeloma randomised trials from 2005 to 2019: A surrogacy analysis

被引:11
|
作者
Etekal, Tommy [1 ]
Koehn, Kelly [2 ]
Sborov, Douglas W. [3 ]
McClune, Brian [3 ]
Prasad, Vinay [4 ]
Haslam, Alyson [5 ]
Berger, Katherine [6 ]
Booth, Christopher [7 ]
Al Hadidi, Samer [8 ]
Abdallah, Al-Ola [2 ]
Goodman, Aaron [9 ]
Mohyuddin, Ghulam Rehman [3 ]
机构
[1] Umea Univ, Dept Radiat Sci, Umea, Sweden
[2] Univ Kansas, Div Hematol Malignancies & Cellular Therapeut, Lawrence, KS USA
[3] Univ Utah, Div Hematol & Hematol Malignancies, Salt Lake City, UT 84112 USA
[4] Univ Calif San Francisco, Div Hematol Oncol, San Francisco, CA USA
[5] Univ Calif San Francisco, Dept Epidemiol Biostat, San Francisco, CA USA
[6] Univ Hartford, Patient Advocate, West Hartford, CT USA
[7] Queens Univ Canc Res Inst, Div Canc Care & Epidemiol, Kingston, ON, Canada
[8] Univ Arkansas Med Sci, Myeloma Inst, Little Rock, AR USA
[9] Univ Calif San Diego, Div Blood & Marrow Transplantat, La Jolla, CA USA
关键词
end-point; multiple myeloma; overall survival; progression-free survival; randomised controlled trial; PROGRESSION-FREE SURVIVAL; DEXAMETHASONE; BORTEZOMIB; METAANALYSIS; ASSOCIATION; CRITERIA; OUTCOMES; THERAPY; RELAPSE; IX;
D O I
10.1111/bjh.18568
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Use of surrogate end-points such as progression-free survival (PFS) and other time-to-event (TTE) end-points is common in multiple myeloma (MM) clinical trials. This systematic review characterises all published randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in MM using PFS or other TTE end-points between 2005 and 2019 and assesses strength of surrogacy of PFS for overall survival (OS). The association between OS hazard ratios (HRs) and PFS HRs was evaluated with linear regression, and the coefficient of determination with Pearson's correlation. We identified 88 RCTs of which 67 (76%) used PFS as the primary/co-primary end-point. One trial indicated whether progression was biochemical or clinical. Of the variance in OS, 39% was due to variance in PFS. Correlation between PFS and OS was weak (0.62, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.38-0.78). In newly diagnosed MM, 43% of the variance in OS was due to changes in PFS. The correlation between PFS and OS was weak (0.65, 95% CI 0.30-0.84). In relapsed/refractory MM, 58% of the variance in OS was due to changes in PFS. Correlation between PFS and OS was medium (0.76, 95% CI 0.42-0.91). We demonstrate that PFS and progression characteristics are characterised poorly in MM trials and that PFS is a poor surrogate for OS in MM.
引用
收藏
页码:587 / 594
页数:8
相关论文
共 47 条
  • [1] Time to Event Surrogate Endpoints in Multiple Myeloma Randomized Trials from 2005-2019: A Surrogacy Analysis
    Etekal, Tommy
    Koehn, Kelly
    Sborov, Douglas W.
    McClune, Brian
    Prasad, Vinay
    Haslam, Alyson
    Berger, Katherine
    Booth, Christopher
    Al Hadidi, Samer
    Abdallah, Al-Ola
    Goodman, Aaron M.
    Mohyuddin, Ghulam Rehman
    BLOOD, 2022, 140 : 5047 - 5049
  • [2] Assessing response and time-to-event end-points: RECIST and mRECIST
    Lencioni, Riccardo
    CLINICAL CANCER RESEARCH, 2022, 28 (17)
  • [3] Guidelines for time-to-event end-point definitions in trials for pancreatic cancer. Results of the DATECAN initiative (Definition for the Assessment of Time-to-event End-points in CANcer trials)
    Bonnetain, Franck
    Bonsing, Bert
    Conroy, Thierry
    Dousseau, Adelaide
    Glimelius, Bengt
    Haustermans, Karin
    Lacaine, Francois
    Van Laethem, Jean Luc
    Aparicio, Thomas
    Aust, Daniela
    Bassi, Claudio
    Berger, Virginie
    Chamorey, Emmanuel
    Chibaudel, Benoist
    Dahan, Laeticia
    De Gramont, Aimery
    Delpero, Jean Robert
    Dervenis, Christos
    Ducreux, Michel
    Gal, Jocelyn
    Gerber, Erich
    Ghaneh, Paula
    Hammel, Pascal
    Hendlisz, Alain
    Jooste, Valerie
    Labianca, Roberto
    Latouche, Aurelien
    Lutz, Manfred
    Macarulla, Teresa
    Malka, David
    Mauer, Muriel
    Mitry, Emmanuel
    Neoptolemos, John
    Pessaux, Patrick
    Sauvanet, Alain
    Tabernero, Josep
    Taieb, Julien
    van Tienhoven, Geertjan
    Gourgou-Bourgade, Sophie
    Bellera, Carine
    Mathoulin-Pelissier, Simone
    Collette, Laurence
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2014, 50 (17) : 2983 - 2993
  • [4] THE ANALYSIS OF MULTIPLE END-POINTS IN CLINICAL-TRIALS
    POCOCK, SJ
    GELLER, NL
    TSIATIS, AA
    BIOMETRICS, 1987, 43 (03) : 487 - 498
  • [5] Surrogacy analysis of intermediate end-points for overall survival in randomized controlled trials of rhabdomyosarcoma
    Kubota, Yuta
    Tanaka, Kazuhiro
    Kawano, Masanori
    Iwasaki, Tatsuya
    Itonaga, Ichiro
    Tsumura, Hiroshi
    SCIENTIFIC REPORTS, 2022, 12 (01)
  • [6] Surrogacy analysis of intermediate end-points for overall survival in randomized controlled trials of rhabdomyosarcoma
    Yuta Kubota
    Kazuhiro Tanaka
    Masanori Kawano
    Tatsuya Iwasaki
    Ichiro Itonaga
    Hiroshi Tsumura
    Scientific Reports, 12
  • [7] ON THE DESIGN AND ANALYSIS OF RANDOMIZED CLINICAL-TRIALS WITH MULTIPLE END-POINTS
    TANG, DI
    GELLER, NL
    POCOCK, SJ
    BIOMETRICS, 1993, 49 (01) : 23 - 30
  • [8] Validation of surrogate end points in multiple randomized clinical trials with failure time end points
    Burzykowski, T
    Molenberghs, G
    JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL STATISTICAL SOCIETY SERIES C-APPLIED STATISTICS, 2001, 50 : 405 - 422
  • [9] Comparative assessment of trial-level surrogacy measures for candidate time-to-event surrogate endpoints in clinical trials
    Shi, Qian
    Renfro, Lindsay A.
    Bot, Brian M.
    Burzykowski, Tomasz
    Buyse, Marc
    Sargent, Daniel J.
    COMPUTATIONAL STATISTICS & DATA ANALYSIS, 2011, 55 (09) : 2748 - 2757
  • [10] ON THE DESIGN AND ANALYSIS OF RANDOMIZED CLINICAL-TRIALS WITH MULTIPLE END-POINTS - COMMENT
    LEHMACHER, W
    WASSNER, G
    REITMEIR, P
    BIOMETRICS, 1994, 50 (02) : 581 - 583