Correlation of changes between 2-year disease-free survival and 5-year overall survival in adjuvant breast cancer trials from 1966 to 2006

Disease-free survival as a surrogate for overall survival in HR+/HER2- early breast cancer: A correlation analysis

BACKGROUND

Overall survival (OS) is a universally accepted measure of clinical benefit; however, prolonged follow-up is needed to observe sufficient events. Disease-free survival (DFS) has been widely adopted as a primary endpoint for early breast cancer (EBC) trials, as follow-up is comparatively shorter. Here, we present an analysis evaluating DFS as a surrogate for OS for adjuvant treatment of hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HR+/HER2-) EBC.

METHODS

A systematic literature review which included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with ≥80% of adult patients with HR+/HER2- EBC was conducted. The RCTs evaluated various systemic therapeutic categories; key inclusion criteria included reporting of DFS and OS hazard ratios (HRs) and mature OS data. Spearman rank correlation and weighted linear regression analyses evaluated DFS and OS HR correlation. A scenario analysis tested base-case analysis robustness, and a parallel analysis using patient-level data was conducted.

RESULTS

The base case (N = 14 RCTs) showed an unweighted Spearman coefficient of 0.81 between OS and DFS (weighted: 0.81), with 84% of the variability in OS explained by DFS differences (R2 from weighted regression). The surrogate threshold effect (Burzykowski T, Buyse M. Pharm Stat. 2006;5:173-186) was 0.82 for DFS/OS HR. Scenario analysis (n = 9 RCTs), which excluded chemotherapy trials, and patient-level analysis using FACE trial data were consistent with the base-case analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

These analyses support DFS as a reliable surrogate endpoint for OS in adjuvant HR+/HER2- EBC trials. Using DFS as a surrogate measure will permit timelier access to novel treatments for patients with HR+/HER2- EBC.

Validation of the RSClin risk calculator in the National Cancer Data Base

BACKGROUND

Guidelines recommend the use of genomic assays such as OncotypeDx to aid in decisions regarding the use of chemotherapy for hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative (HR+/HER2-) breast cancer. The RSClin prognostic tool integrates OncotypeDx and clinicopathologic features to predict distant recurrence and chemotherapy benefit, but further validation is needed before broad clinical adoption.

METHODS

This study included patients from the National Cancer Data Base (NCDB) who were diagnosed with stage I-III HR+/HER2- breast cancer from 2010 to 2020 and received adjuvant endocrine therapy with or without chemotherapy. RSClin-predicted chemotherapy benefit was stratified into low (<3% reduction in distant recurrence), intermediate (3%-5%), and high (>5%). Cox models were used to model mortality adjusted for age, comorbidity index, insurance, and race/ethnicity.

RESULTS

A total of 285,441 patients were identified for inclusion from the NCDB, with an average age of 60 years and a median follow-up of 58 months. Chemotherapy was associated with improved overall survival only for those predicted to have intermediate (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.68; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.60-0.79) and high benefit per RSClin (aHR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.61-0.72). Consistent benefit was seen in the subset with a low OncotypeDx score (<26) and intermediate (aHR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.53-0.82) or high (aHR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.58-0.86) RSClin-predicted benefit. No survival benefit with chemotherapy was seen in patients with a high OncotypeDx score (≥26) and low benefit per RSClin (aHR, 1.70; 95% CI, 0.41-6.99).

CONCLUSIONS

RSClin may identify high-risk patients who benefit from treatment intensification more accurately than OncotypeDx, and further prospective study is needed.

Intermediate clinical endpoints in early-stage breast cancer: an analysis of individual patient data from the Gruppo Italiano Mammella and Mammella Intergruppo trials

Background

Intermediate clinical endpoints (ICEs) are frequently used as primary endpoint in randomised trials (RCTs). We aim to assess whether changes in different ICEs can be used to predict changes in overall survival (OS) in adjuvant breast cancer trials.

Methods

Individual patient level data from adjuvant phase III RCTs conducted by the Gruppo Italiano Mammella (GIM) and Mammella Intergruppo (MIG) study groups were used. ICEs were computed according to STEEP criteria. Using a two-stage meta-analytic model, we assessed the surrogacy of each ICE at both the outcome (i.e., OS and ICE are correlated irrespective of treatment) and trial (i.e., treatment effects on ICE and treatment effect on OS are correlated) levels. The following ICEs were considered as potential surrogate endpoints of OS: disease-free survival (DFS), distant disease-free survival (DDFS), distant relapse-free survival (DRFS), recurrence-free survival (RFS), recurrence-free interval (RFI), distant recurrence-free interval (DRFI), breast cancer-free interval (BCFI), and invasive breast cancer-free survival (IBCFS). The estimates of the degree of correlation were obtained by copula models and weighted linear regression. Kendall's τ and R2 ≥ 0.70 were considered as indicators of a clinically relevant surrogacy.

Findings

Among the 12,397 patients enrolled from November 1992 to July 2012 in six RCTs, median age at enrolment was 57 years (interquartile range (IQR) 49-65). After a median follow-up of 10.3 years (IQR 6.4-14.5), 2131 (17.2%) OS events were observed, with 1390 (65.2%) attributed to breast cancer. At the outcome-level, Kendall's τ ranged from 0.69 for BCFI to 0.84 for DRFS. For DFS, DDFS, DRFS, RFS, RFI, DRFI, BCFI, and IBCFS endpoints, over 95% of the 8-year OS variability was attributable to the variation of the 5-year ICE. At the trial-level, treatment effects for the different ICEs and OS were strongly correlated, with the highest correlation for RFS and DRFS and the lowest for BCFI.

Interpretation

Our results provide evidence supporting the use of DFS, DDFS, DRFS, RFS, RFI, DRFI, and IBCFS as primary endpoint in breast cancer adjuvant trials.

Funding

This analysis was supported by the Italian Association for Cancer Research ("Associazione Italiana per la Ricerca sul Cancro", AIRC; IG 2017/20760) and by Italian Ministry of Health-5 × 1000 funds (years 2021-2022).

Correlation between pathologic complete response, event-free survival/disease-free survival and overall survival in neoadjuvant and/or adjuvant HR+/HER2-breast cancer

Purpose

The study's purpose was to evaluate the correlation between overall survival (OS) and its potential surrogate endpoints: pathologic complete response (pCR) and event-free survival (EFS)/disease-free survival (DFS) in neoadjuvant and/or adjuvant HR+/HER2- breast cancer.

Methods

Systematic search was performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library databases and other relevant sources to identify literature that have reported outcomes of interest in the target setting. The strength of correlation of EFS/DFS with OS, pCR with OS, and pCR with EFS/DFS was measured using Pearson's correlation coefficient (r) based on weighted regression analysis. For Surrogate Endpoint-True Endpoint pairs where correlation was found to be moderate, surrogate threshold effect (STE) was estimated using a mixed-effects model. Sensitivity analyses were conducted on the scale and weights used and removing outlier data.

Results

Moderate correlation was observed of relative measures [log(HR)] of EFS/DFS and OS (r = 0.91; 95% CI: 0.83, 0.96, p < 0.0001). STE for HR_EFS/DFS was estimated to be 0.73. Association between EFS/DFS at 1, 2 and 3 years with OS at 4- and 5-year landmarks was moderate. Relative treatment effects of pCR and EFS/DFS were not strongly associated (r: 0.24; 95% CI: -0.63, 0.84, p = 0.6028). Correlation between pCR and OS was either not evaluated due to inadequate sample size (relative outcomes) or weak (absolute outcomes). Results obtained in the sensitivity analyses were similar to base scenario.

Conclusion

EFS/DFS were moderately correlated with OS in this trial-level analysis. They may be considered as valid surrogates for OS in HR+/HER2- breast cancer.

Surrogate endpoints for early-stage breast cancer: a review of the state of the art, controversies, and future prospects

Drug approval for early-stage breast cancer (EBC) has been historically granted in the context of registration trials based on adequate outcomes such as disease-free survival and overall survival. Improvements in long-term outcomes have made it more difficult to demonstrate the clinical benefit of a new cancer drug in large, randomized, comparative clinical trials. Therefore, the use of surrogate endpoints rather than traditional measures allows for cancer drug trials to proceed with smaller sample sizes and shorter follow-up periods, which reduces drug development time. Among surrogate endpoints for breast cancer, the increase in pathological complete response (pCR) rates was considered appropriate for accelerated drug approval. The association between pCR and long-term outcomes was strongest in patients with aggressive tumor subtypes, such as triple-negative and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive/hormone receptor-negative breast cancers. Whereas in hormone receptor-positive/HER2-negative EBC, the most accepted surrogate markers for endocrine therapy-based trials include changes in Ki67 and the preoperative endocrine prognostic index. Beyond the classic endpoints, further prognostic tools are required to provide EBC patients with individualized and effective therapies, and the neoadjuvant setting provides an excellent platform for drug development and biomarker discovery. Nowadays, the availability of multigene signatures is offering a standardized quantitative and reproducible tool to potentiate the efficacy of standard treatment for high-risk patients and develop de-escalated treatments for patients at lower risk of relapse. In this article, we first evaluate the surrogacies used for long-term outcomes and the underlying evidence supporting the use of each surrogate endpoint for the accelerated or regular drug approval process in EBC. Next, we provide an overview of the most recent studies and innovative strategies in a (neo)adjuvant setting as a platform to accelerate new drug approval. Finally, we highlight some clinical trials aimed at tailoring systemic treatment of EBC using prognosis-related factors or early biomarkers of drug sensitivity or resistance.

Physicians’ Perception of the Evidence in Relation to Primary Endpoints of Clinical Trials on Breast Cancer

<b><i>Objective:</i></b> To investigate physicians’ perception of the evidence of clinical trials on breast cancer. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> A survey was conducted by the Chinese Society of Breast Surgeons. We investigated the physicians’ perception of meaningful endpoints, appropriate follow-up duration, and clinically acceptable benefit through online questionnaires. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Among 278 validated questionnaires, the majority of the questions had no consistent answer. For local treatment, 30.6, 28.8, and 28.4% of participants regarded locoregional recurrence (LRR), disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS) as the most meaningful endpoint, respectively, 47.5% believed that 5-year follow-up can alter clinical practice, and 34.5% thought it should be &#x3e;10 years. In the adjuvant setting, 45.7, 38.5, and 12.9% regarded DFS, OS, and LRR as the most meaningful endpoint, respectively, 52.5% thought that 10-year follow-up was solid, while 37.4% thought that 5-year follow-up was enough. In the advanced setting, 49.6, 24.1, and 23.7% considered progression-free survival, quality of life, and OS the most meaningful endpoint, respectively, and 39.6 and 28.8% considered that a follow-up of 1 year and 3 years, respectively, was meaningful. Similarly, the clinically acceptable absolute difference was inconsistent. <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> Most Chinese oncologists advocated that surrogate endpoints could be used in certain circumstances, though OS was the most reliable one in breast cancer studies. Doctors’ perceptions of follow-up time and magnitude of benefit vary widely, reflecting the fact that there are many unanswered questions about supporting the use of new cancer treatments; a common understanding needs to be reached, such as a very consensual surrogate endpoint and a meaningful sufficiently large therapeutic benefit.

Surrogate Endpoints in Oncology: Overview of Systematic Reviews and Their Use for Health Decision Making in Mexico

OBJECTIVES

The use of surrogate endpoints (SEs) for cancer drug approval in health systems is common. The objectives of this study were to identify systematic reviews (SRs) that evaluated the correlation of SEs with overall survival (OS) in cancer drugs to analyze the applications of approved cancer drugs with SEs in Mexico and to apply the validation framework proposed by the Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG).

METHODS

An overview of SRs was conducted according to Cochrane Collaboration methodology. Applications for approved cancer drugs with SEs in Mexico were analyzed. The IQWiG validation framework was applied to evaluate the SEs identified in the overview and in the applications in Mexico.

RESULTS

A total of 85 SRs that assessed 192 SEs for different types of cancer were selected. According to the IQWiG model, only 2.5% of the SEs analyzed in the overview and only one of the applications in Mexico could be used as surrogates for OS because the reliability (methodological quality) of the SRs and the strength of the correlation of SEs with OS was mostly low (92%) and low (correlation coefficient r ≤ 0.7; 50.5%), respectively. Of the total number of cancer drugs approved in Mexico, 19.4% used SEs.

CONCLUSIONS

Most SEs for different types of cancer could not be used as surrogates for OS according to the IQWiG model, and their use for the approval of cancer drugs in Mexico is generally not justified.

Evaluating the evidence behind the surrogate measures included in the FDA's table of surrogate endpoints as supporting approval of cancer drugs

BACKGROUND

In July 2018, the FDA first published a table listing all surrogate measures that it has used, and may accept for future use, in regulatory approval. However, the strength of surrogacy for those measures was not formally assessed. Using the case example of breast cancer, we aimed to evaluate the strength of correlation of surrogate measures listed in the FDA's Table with overall survival.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study of the FDA's Table of Surrogate Endpoints was conducted in May 2019. All surrogate measures listed in the FDA table as appropriate for accelerated or regular approval for breast cancer were extracted. We identified studies evaluating the correlation of treatment benefit in the surrogate with treatment benefit in overall survival and extracted results from the correlation analysis.

FINDINGS

Five surrogate endpoints were listed for breast cancer in the FDA website: pathological complete response rates (pCR), event-free survival (EFS), disease-free survival (DFS), objective response rates (ORR), and progression-free survival (PFS), of which pCR was listed as appropriate only for accelerated approval, while the rest were considered appropriate for accelerated or regular approval. No correlation study evaluated the correlation of treatment effects on EFS with that on OS. The results from correlation studies evaluating pCR, DFS, ORR, and PFS suggest that the treatment effects on none of these surrogate measures were strongly correlated with treatment effects on OS (r<0.85 or R²  < 0.7, except for DFS in HER2 positive early breast cancer (R²  = 0.75).

INTERPRETATION

Using breast cancer as an example, we evaluated the underlying evidence for the surrogate endpoints for solid tumors listed in the FDA's Table of Surrogate Endpoints and found weak or missing correlations of treatment effects on these surrogates with treatment effects on OS . Surrogate measures should be predictive of clinical benefit to be useful in supporting regular FDA approval.

FUNDING

Work on this project was funded by the Arnold Ventures. Dr. Kesselheim is also supported by the Harvard-MIT Center for Regulatory Science. The funders had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication.

Biological acellular pericardial mesh regulated tissue integration and remodeling in a rat model of breast prosthetic implantation

The use of biological meshes has proven beneficial in surgical restriction and periprosthetic capsular contracture following breast prosthetic-reconstruction. Three different types (smooth, texturized, and polyurethane) of silicone round mini prostheses were implanted under rat skin with or without two different bovine acellular pericardial biological meshes (APMs, BioRipar, and Tutomesh). One hundred eighty-six female rats were divided into 12 groups, sacrificed after 3, 6, and 24 weeks and tissue samples investigated by histology and immunohistochemistry. Implantation of both APMs, with or without prostheses, reduced capsular α-SMA expression and CD3⁺ inflammatory cell infiltration, increasing capillary density and cell proliferation, with some differences. In particular, Tutomesh was associated with higher peri-APM CD3⁺ inflammation, prosthetic capsular dermal α-SMA expression and less CD31⁺ vessels and cell proliferation compared with BioRipar. None differences were observed in tissue integration and remodeling following the APM + prostheses implantation; the different prostheses did not influence tissue remodeling. The aim of our study was to investigate if/how the use of different APMs, with peculiar intrinsic characteristics, may influence tissue integration. The structure of APMs critically influenced tissue remodeling after implantation. Further studies are needed to develop new APMs able to optimize tissue integration and neoangiogenesis minimizing periprosthetic inflammation and fibrosis.

An individualized prognostic signature and multi‑omics distinction for early stage hepatocellular carcinoma patients with surgical resection

Previously reported prognostic signatures for predicting the prognoses of postsurgical hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients are commonly based on predefined risk scores, which are hardly applicable to samples measured by different laboratories. To solve this problem, using gene expression profiles of 170 stage I/II HCC samples, we identified a prognostic signature consisting of 20 gene pairs whose within-sample relative expression orderings (REOs) could robustly predict the disease-free survival and overall survival of HCC patients. This REOs-based prognostic signature was validated in two independent datasets. Functional enrichment analysis showed that the patients with high-risk of recurrence were characterized by the activations of pathways related to cell proliferation and tumor microenvironment, whereas the low-risk patients were characterized by the activations of various metabolism pathways. We further investigated the distinct epigenomic and genomic characteristics of the two prognostic groups using The Cancer Genome Atlas samples with multi-omics data. Epigenetic analysis showed that the transcriptional differences between the two prognostic groups were significantly concordant with DNA methylation alternations. The signaling network analysis identified several key genes (e.g. TP53, MYC) with epigenomic or genomic alternations driving poor prognoses of HCC patients. These results help us understand the multi-omics mechanisms determining the outcomes of HCC patients.

Relapse-Free Survival as a Surrogate for Overall Survival in the Evaluation of Stage II-III Melanoma Adjuvant Therapy

Background

We assessed whether relapse-free survival (RFS; time until recurrence/death) is a valid surrogate for overall survival (OS) among resected stage II-III melanoma patients through a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Methods

Individual patient data (IPD) on RFS and OS were collected from 5826 patients enrolled in 11 randomized adjuvant trials comparing interferon (IFN) to observation. In addition, IPD from two studies comparing IFN and vaccination in 989 patients were included. A two-level modeling approach was used for assessing Spearman's patient-level correlation (rho) of RFS and OS and the trial-level coefficient of determination (R²) of the treatment effects on RFS and on OS. The results were validated externally in 13 adjuvant studies without available IPD. We then tested the results on the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) 18071 double-blind trial comparing ipilimumab 10 mg/kg with placebo, which showed a statistically significant impact of the checkpoint inhibitor on RFS and OS. All statistical tests were two-sided.

Results

With a median follow-up of seven years, 12 of 13 trials showed a consistency between the IFN vs No IFN differences regarding RFS (hazard ratio [HR]RFS = 0.88) and OS (HROS = 0.91), but the small trial, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group 2696, was an outlier (HRRFS = 0.72 vs HROS = 1.11). Therefore, even if rho was high, R² was low and could not reliably be estimated. Based on the 12 trials, rho remained high (0.89), and the hazard ratios for RFS and OS were strongly correlated (R² = 0.91). The surrogate threshold effect for RFS was estimated to be 0.77. For the EORTC 18071 trial, the hazard ratio for RFS was 0.75, predicting an effect of ipilimumab on OS. This was subsequently confirmed (HROS = 0.72, 95.1% confidence interval = 0.58 to 0.88, P = .001).

Conclusions

In high-risk stage II-III melanoma, RFS appeared to be a valid surrogate end point for OS for adjuvant randomized studies assessing interferon or a checkpoint inhibitor. In future similar adjuvant studies, a hazard ratio for RFS of 0.77 or less would predict a treatment impact on OS.

Strength of Validation for Surrogate End Points Used in the US Food and Drug Administration's Approval of Oncology Drugs

OBJECTIVE

To determine the strength of the surrogate-survival correlation for cancer drug approvals based on a surrogate.

PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective study of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) database, with focused searches of MEDLINE and Google Scholar. Among cancer drugs approved based on a surrogate end point, we examined previous publications assessing the strength of the surrogate-survival correlation. Specifically, we identified the percentage of surrogate approvals lacking any formal analysis of the strength of the surrogate-survival correlation, and when conducted, the strength of such correlations.

RESULTS

Between January 1, 2009, and December 31, 2014, the FDA approved marketing applications for 55 indications based on a surrogate, of which 25 were accelerated approvals and 30 were traditional approvals. We could not find any formal analyses of the strength of the surrogate-survival correlation in 14 out of 25 accelerated approvals (56%) and 11 out of 30 traditional approvals (37%). For accelerated approvals, just 4 approvals (16%) were made where a level 1 analysis (the most robust way to validate a surrogate) had been performed, with all 4 studies reporting low correlation (r≤0.7). For traditional approvals, a level 1 analysis had been performed for 15 approvals (50%): 8 (53%) reported low correlation (r≤0.7), 4 (27%) medium correlation (r>0.7 to r<0.85), and 3 (20%) high correlation (r≥0.85) with survival.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of surrogate end points for drug approval often lacks formal empirical verification of the strength of the surrogate-survival association.

Organizing medical oncology care at a regional level and its subsequent impact on the quality of early breast cancer management: a before-after study

BACKGROUND

One of the main measures of the French national cancer plan is to encourage physicians to work collectively, and to minimize territorial inequities in access to care by rethinking the geographical distribution of oncologists. For this reason, cancer care services are currently being reorganized at national level. A new infrastructure for multidisciplinary cancer care delivery has been put in place in our region. Patients can receive multidisciplinary health care services nearer their homes, thanks to a mobile team of oncologists. The objective of our study was to assess, using a quality approach, the impact on medical management and on the costs of treating early breast cancer, of the new regional structure for cancer care delivery.

METHODS

Before-and-after study performed from 2007 to 2010, including patients treated for early breast cancer in three hospitals in the region of Franche-Comté in Eastern France. The main outcome measures were quality criteria, namely delayed treatment (>12 weeks), dose-intensity and assessment of adjuvant chemotherapy. Other outcomes were 24-month progression-free survival (PFS) and economic evaluation.

RESULTS

This study included 667 patients. The rate of chemotherapy tended to decrease, but not significantly (49.3% before versus 42.2% after, p=0.07), while the use of taxanes increased by 38% across all centres (59.6% before versus 98.0% after, p < 0.0001). There was a non-significant reduction in the time between surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy (6.0 ± 3.0 weeks before versus 5.6 ± 3.6 weeks after, p=0.11). Dose-dense chemotherapy improved slightly, albeit non significantly (86.3% versus 91.1% p=0.22) and time to treatment tended to decrease. The new regional infrastructure did not change 24-month PFS, which remained at about 96%. The average cost of treatment was estimated at € 7000, with no difference between the two periods.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite a shortage of oncologists, the new organization put in place in our region for the provision of care for early breast cancer makes it possible to maintain local community-based treatment, without negative economic consequences. This new structure for cancer care delivery offers cancer services of similar quality with no modification of 24-month PFS in early breast cancer.

Review of meta-analyses evaluating surrogate endpoints for overall survival in oncology

Overall survival (OS) is the gold standard in measuring the treatment effect of new drug therapies for cancer. However, practical factors may preclude the collection of unconfounded OS data, and surrogate endpoints are often used instead. Meta-analyses have been widely used for the validation of surrogate endpoints, specifically in oncology. This research reviewed published meta-analyses on the types of surrogate measures used in oncology studies and examined the extent of correlation between surrogate endpoints and OS for different cancer types. A search was conducted in October 2010 to compile available published evidence in the English language for the validation of disease progression-related endpoints as surrogates of OS, based on meta-analyses. We summarize published meta-analyses that quantified the correlation between progression-based endpoints and OS for multiple advanced solid-tumor types. We also discuss issues that affect the interpretation of these findings. Progression-free survival is the most commonly used surrogate measure in studies of advanced solid tumors, and correlation with OS is reported for a limited number of cancer types. Given the increased use of crossover in trials and the availability of second-/third-line treatment options available to patients after progression, it will become increasingly more difficult to establish correlation between effects on progression-free survival and OS in additional tumor types.

Guidelines for health technologies: specific guidance for oncology products in Canada

OBJECTIVE

Specific methodological challenges are often encountered during cancer-related economic evaluations. The objective of this study was to provide specific guidance to analysts on the methods for the conduct of high-quality economic evaluations in oncology by building on the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health Guidelines for the Economic Evaluation of Health Technologies (third edition).

METHODS

Fifteen oncologists, health economists, health services researchers, and decision makers from across Canada identified sections in Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health guidelines that would benefit from oncology-specific guidance. Fifteen sections of the guidelines were reviewed to determine whether 1) Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health guidelines were sufficient for the conduct of oncology economic evaluations without further guidance specific for oncology products or 2) additional guidance was necessary. A scoping review was conducted by using a comprehensive and replicable search to identify relevant literature to inform recommendations. Recommendations were reviewed by representatives of academia, government, and the pharmaceutical industry in an iterative and formal review of the recommendations.

RESULTS

Major adaptations for guidance related to time horizon, effectiveness, modeling, costs, and resources were required. Recommendations around the use of final outcomes over intermediate outcomes to calculate quality-adjusted life-years and life-years gained, the type of evidence, the source of evidence, and the use of time horizon and modeling were made.

CONCLUSIONS

This article summarizes key recommendations for the conduct of economic evaluations in oncology and describes methods required to ensure that economic assessments in oncology are conducted in a standardized manner.

Randomized controlled trials in the era of molecular oncology: methodology, biomarkers, and end points

BACKGROUND

We previously reported metrics of systemic therapy randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in breast cancer, colorectal cancer (CRC), and non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) published 1975-2004. To evaluate trends in the era of targeted therapies (TT), we have repeated a similar analysis of RCTs published 2005-2009.

METHODS

A search for phase III RCTs of systemic agents published in five major journals 2005-2009 was carried out. Trials were classified as TT if they involved any non-hormonal targeted agent. We extracted data regarding biomarker use. Integral biomarkers were defined as tests used to determine eligibility, stratification, or allocation. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze trends over time.

RESULTS

One hundred and thirty-seven eligible RCTs were evaluated. Compared with 1995-2004, the number (17-27 RCTs/year) and size (median sample size 446-722, P < 0.001) of RCTs increased. The proportion of RCTs evaluating TT increased from 4% (7/167) to 29% (40/137) (P < 0.001). There was an increase in the proportion of trials with financial support from industry [57% (95/167) to 78% (107/137), P = 0.001]. Biomarkers were included in 58% (80/137) of RCTs; integral biomarkers were included in 36% (49/137) of trials. Among the 49 RCTs using integral biomarkers, 40 (82%) used HER2 and/or ER/PR status in studies of breast cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

RCTs published in 2005-2009 are larger, more likely to evaluate TT, and be supported by industry. Biomarkers may be increasingly used, but the most common use relates to traditional use of ER/PR and evolving use of HER2 in breast cancer RCTs.

Prognostic and predictive value of clinical and biochemical factors in breast cancer patients with bone metastases receiving "metronomic" zoledronic acid

Background

To assess prognostic and predictive effects of clinical and biochemical factors in our published randomized study of a weekly low dose (metronomic arm) versus a conventional dosage of zoledronic acid (conventional arm) in breast cancer patients with bone metastases.

Methods

Treatment outcome of 60 patients with bone metastases were used to assess impacts of following potential prognostic factors, estrogen receptor status, lymph node status, 2 year-disease free interval (DFI), numbers of chemotherapy regimens administered, interventions, and serum levels of VEGF, N-telopeptide of type I collagen (NTx), CEA, and CA 15-3.

Results

In univariate analyses, patients pretreated with 2 or fewer chemotherapy regimens, ER-positive tumors, 3 or fewer lymph nodes, DFI of more than 2 years, serum VEGF of less than 500 pg/mL after 3 months of intervention, serum CEA and CA 15-3 of less than ULN, and baseline serum NTx of less than 18 nM BCE had significantly longer progression free survival (PFS). The multivariate analysis showed that ER positivity (hazard ratio [HR], 0.295; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.141-0.618; P = 0.001), serum VEGF of less than 500 pg/mL after 3 months of intervention (HR, 2.220; 95% CI, 1.136-4.338; P = 0.020), baseline serum NTx of less than 18 nM BCE (HR, 2.842; 95% CI, 1.458-5.539; P = 0.001), and 2 or fewer chemotherapy regimens received (HR, 7.803; 95% CI, 2.884-21.112; P = 0.000) were associated with a better PFS. When evaluating the predictive effect of the biochemical factors, an interaction between NTx and zoledronic acid intervention was shown (P = 0.005). The HR of weekly low dose versus a conventional dosage of zoledronic acid was estimated to be 2.309 (99% CI, 1.067-5.012) in patients with baseline serum NTx of more than 18 nM BCE, indicating a superiority of weekly low dose of zoledronic acid.

Conclusions

ER, serum VEGF level after intervention, and numbers of chemotherapy regimens administered are prognostic but not predictive factors in breast cancer patients with bone metastases. Patients with baseline serum NTx of more than 18 nM BCE might benefit more from weekly low-dose of zoledronic acid.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov unique identifier: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00524849

An updated review on the efficacy of adjuvant endocrine therapies in hormone receptor-positive early breast cancer

The third-generation aromatase inhibitors (AIS) are largely replacing tamoxifen in the adjuvant treatment of early-stage breast cancer in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor–positive tumours. To date, multiple trials have been conducted comparing tamoxifen treatment with an AI, and all have demonstrated improved disease-free survival with AI treatment. Trials have included direct 5-year comparisons between tamoxifen and an AI, switching to an AI within 5 years after initial tamoxifen treatment, or extending treatment with an AI after 5 years of completed tamoxifen treatment. Some of these trials have been completed; others are ongoing; and head-to-head trial comparisons of individual AIS are also in progress. The present article summarizes the data obtained from various clinical trials of hormonal therapy for early breast cancer. It also reviews recent data so as to shed light on the current status of these therapies. The focus is on the efficacy of treatment with an AI. Toxicity is discussed in the second article in this supplement.

Identification of potential surrogate end points in randomized clinical trials of aggressive and indolent non-Hodgkin's lymphoma: correlation of complete response, time-to-event and overall survival end points

BACKGROUND

The correlation between efficacy end points in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of systemic therapy for non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) was investigated to identify an appropriate surrogate end point for overall survival (OS).

METHODS

RCTs of previously untreated NHL published from 1990 to 2009 were identified. Associations between absolute differences in efficacy end points were determined using nonparametric Spearman's rank correlation coefficients (r(s)).

RESULTS

Thirty-eight RCTs representing 85 treatment arms for aggressive NHL and 20 RCTs representing 42 arms for indolent NHL were included. For aggressive NHL, differences in 3-year progression-free survival (PFS)/event-free survival (EFS) were high correlated with differences in 5-year OS {r(s) of 0.90 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.73-0.96]} and linear regression determined that a 10% improvement in 3-year EFS or PFS would predict for a 7% ± 1% improvement in 5-year OS. For indolent histology disease, differences in complete response were strongly correlated with differences in 3-year EFS [r(s) 0.86 (95% CI 0.35-0.97)], but there was no correlation between 3-year time-to-event end points and 5-year OS.

CONCLUSIONS

Improvements in 3-year EFS/PFS are highly correlated with improvements in 5-year OS in aggressive NHL and should be explored as a candidate surrogate end point. Definition of these relationships may inform future clinical trial design and interpretation of interim trial data.

Clinical and pathological characteristics of Chinese patients with BRCA related breast cancer

Breast cancers related to BRCA mutations are associated with particular biological features. Here we report the clinical and pathological characteristics of breast cancer in Chinese women with and without BRCA mutations and of carriers of BRCA1 mutations compared to BRCA2 mutations. Two hundred and 26 high-risk Hong Kong Chinese women were tested for BRCA mutations, medical information was obtained from medical records, and risk and demographic information was obtained from personal interviews. In this cohort, 28 (12.4%) women were BRCA mutation carriers and among these carriers, 39.3% were BRCA1 and 60.7% were BRCA2 mutations. Mutation carriers were more likely to have a familial history of breast and ovarian cancer, high-grade cancers, and triple negative (TN) cancers. Prevalence of TN was 48.3% in BRCA carriers and 25.6% in non-carriers and was 67.7% in BRCA1 and 35.3% in BRCA2 carriers. Estrogen receptor (ER) negative cancer was significantly associated with BRCA1 mutations, especially in those under 40 years of age. BRCA-related breast cancer in this Chinese population is associated with family history and adverse pathological/prognostic features, with BRCA2 mutations being more prevalent but BRCA1 carriers having more aggressive and TN cancers. Compared to Caucasian populations, prevalence of BRCA2 mutations and TN cancer in BRCA2 mutation carriers in Chinese population are elevated.

Relationship between effects on time-to-disease progression and overall survival in studies of metastatic breast cancer

The relationship between overall survival (OS) and disease progression end points has been demonstrated in colorectal, colon, and non-small cell lung cancers. We assessed the association between OS and time-to-progression (TTP) or progression-free survival (PFS) in metastatic breast cancer (MBC) studies. A literature search retrieved all randomised controlled trials since 1994 in patients with MBC in which OS and either TTP or PFS were reported. Summary data on trial and patient characteristics were abstracted. Study effect sizes were derived as the ratio of median progression (or survival) times, which approximates the hazard ratio. Effects were centred at zero for regression analyses weighted by sample size. Numerous treatments were represented in 67 studies (17 081 patients). Modeling showed a positive association between outcomes for progression and survival (R(2)=0.30) with a slope of 0.32 (P<0.001) and a non-significant intercept. Thus, a treatment effect on TTP/PFS translated into a concordant effect on OS, but with attenuated effect size. Similar results were found in models of subsets and sensitivity analyses. These results demonstrate that treatment effects on progression end points in MBC trials are expected to result in treatment differences on OS that are smaller yet consistently in the same direction.