Surrogate endpoints in advanced sarcoma trials: a meta-analysis

New benchmarks to design clinical trials with advanced or metastatic liposarcoma or synovial sarcoma patients: An EORTC - Soft Tissue and Bone Sarcoma Group (STBSG) meta-analysis based on a literature review for soft-tissue sarcomas

BACKGROUND

Recently, we performed a meta-analysis based on a literature review for STS trials (published 2003-2018, ≥10 adult patients) to update long-standing reference values for leiomyosarcomas. This work is extended for liposarcomas (LPS) and synovial sarcomas (SS).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Study endpoints were progression-free survival rates (PFSRs) at 3 and 6 months. Trial-specific estimates were pooled per treatment line (first-line or pre-treated) with random effects meta-analyses. The choice of the therapeutic benefit to target in future trials was guided by the European Society for Medical Oncology Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS).

RESULTS

Information was acquired for 1030 LPS patients (25 trials; 7 first-line, 17 pre-treated, 1 both) and 348 SS patients (13 trials; 3 first-line, 10 pre-treated). For LPS, the overall pooled first-line PFSRs were 69% (95%-CI 60-77%) and 56% (95%-CI 45-67%) at 3 and 6 months, respectively. These rates were 49% (95%-CI 40-57%)/28% (95%-CI 22-34%) for >1 lines. For SS, first-line PFSRs were 74% (95%-CI 58-86%)/56% (95%-CI 31-78%) at 3 and 6 months, and pre-treated rates were 45% (95%-CI 34-57%)/25% (95%-CI 16-36%). Following ESMO-MCBS guidelines, the minimum values to target are 79% and 69% for first-line LPS (82% and 69% for SS) at 3 and 6 months. For pre-treated LPS, recommended PFSRs at 3 and 6 months suggesting drug activity are 63% and 44% (60% and 41% for SS).

CONCLUSIONS

New benchmarks are proposed for advanced/metastatic LPS or SS to design future histology-specific phase II trials. More data are needed to provide definitive thresholds for the different LPS subtypes.

Cardiac events among patients with sarcoma treated with doxorubicin by method of infusion: A real-world database study

BACKGROUND

Administration of doxorubicin by continuous intravenous (CIV) infusion, versus bolus (BOL) administration, has been proposed to mitigate the risk of cardiac events. This study used real-world data to explore the association between mode of doxorubicin administration and duration of treatment, time-to-treatment failure (TTF), and cardiac events.

METHODS

Occurrence of cardiac events after initiation of BOL versus CIV doxorubicin for sarcoma in the International Business Machines MarketScan claims database were compared. Duration of doxorubicin treatment, TTF, and time-to-first-cardiac event (TCE) were evaluated using Kaplan-Meier method and unadjusted and adjusted Cox regression models.

RESULTS

A total of 196 patients were included in the BOL group and 399 in the CIV group. In unadjusted analyses, there were significant differences between BOL versus CIV for duration of doxorubicin treatment (median 1.4 vs. 2.1 months, p = .002), TTF (median 8.8 vs. 5.6 months, p = .002), and TCE (medians not reached, p = .03). Adjusting for baseline covariates, only TTF remained significant (hazard ratio: 0.71, 95% confidence interval 0.59-0.86, p = .0004), favoring BOL.

CONCLUSIONS

While the risk of cardiac complications was higher with BOL in unadjusted analysis, the risk was no longer present in the adjusted analysis. While we cannot draw causal inferences due to the retrospective, nonrandomized study design, these data suggest that replacing BOL with prolonged CIV administration has not been effective as a strategy to mitigate cardiac events, given community standards of oncologic practice.

In search of effective therapies: the current landscape of phase II trials in patients with advanced soft tissue sarcoma

PURPOSE

Soft tissue sarcomas (STS) are diagnosed in 4-6 cases per 100 000 people a year and are associated with an unfavorable prognosis. Around one-third of patients will develop metastatic disease that requires palliative systemic therapy. Current therapeutic options have limited activity, and new treatments are tested, mainly in phase II trials. There is high variability and no standardization of phase II designs. We aimed to analyze the current landscape of phase II studies in STS and evaluate how its statistical design can affect the results.

METHODS

Full-text phase II studies published in STS patients between 2005 and 2020 were identified and analyzed.

RESULTS

We have identified 102 trials, of which 77.4% were single-arm trials, 16.7% were randomized comparative trials (RCT), and 5.9% were randomized noncomparative trials. Including multiple cohorts, 22 randomized and 128 single-arm cohorts were analyzed. Nearly 80% of trials reported full statistical bases of the design. Over 20 different primary endpoints were used, with PFS as the most common in RCT trials (81.8%) and ORR (36.7%) and 3-months progression-free survival (PFS) rate (21.9%) in single-arm trials. Overall, 27.3% of RCT and 37.5% of single-arm trials were positive. Among single-arm trials, studies using 3- or 6-month rates were more often positive than those based on ORR.

CONCLUSIONS

There is high heterogeneity in sarcoma trial designs, mainly in primary-endpoint and hypotheses used for size calculation. There is an unmet need for standardization that will incorporate factors associated with the rarity of the disease, outcomes detected in previous trials and real-life studies, and specific characteristics of new therapeutic agents.

Efficacy thresholds for clinical trials with advanced or metastatic leiomyosarcoma patients: A European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Soft Tissue and Bone Sarcoma Group meta-analysis based on a literature review for soft-tissue sarcomas

BACKGROUND

In 2002, the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Soft Tissue and Bone Sarcoma Group reported well-established values for conducting phase II trials for soft-tissue sarcomas. An update is provided for leiomyosarcoma (LMS).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Clinical trials with advanced or metastatic LMS were identified via literature review in PubMed (published 2003-2018, ≥10 adult LMS patients). End-points were 3- and 6-month progression-free survival rates (PFSR-3m and PFSR-6m). When estimates could not be derived from publications, data requests were sent out. Treatments were classified as recommended (R-T) or non-recommended (NR-T) according to the ESMO 2018 guidelines. A random effects meta-analysis was used to pool trial-specific estimates for first-line (1L) or pre-treated (2L+) patients separately. The ESMO Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale was used to guide the treatment effect to target in future trials.

RESULTS

From 47 studies identified, we obtained information on 7 1L and 16 2L+ trials for 1500 LMS patients. Overall, in 1L, PFSR-3m and PFSR-6m were 74% (95% confidence interval [CI] 64-82%) and 58% (95% CI 50-66%), respectively. For 2L+, PFSR-3m was 48% (95% CI 41-54%), and PFSR-6m was 28% (95% CI 22-34%). No difference was observed between R-T and NR-T for first or later lines. Under the alternative that the true benefit amounts to a hazard ratio of 0.65, a PFSR-6m ≥70% can be considered to suggest drug activity in 1L. For 2L+, a PFSR-3m ≥62% or PFSR-6m ≥44% would suggest drug activity. Specific results are also provided for uterine LMS.

CONCLUSIONS

This work provides a new benchmark for designing phase II studies for advanced or metastatic LMS.

Surrogate endpoints for overall survival in randomised controlled trials of localised osteosarcoma: A meta-analytic evaluation

Event-free survival (EFS) is considered the most reliable surrogate endpoint for overall survival (OS) in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of adjuvant therapies for malignant tumours. However, the surrogacy of intermediate endpoints such as EFS for OS in trials of patients with osteosarcoma has not been investigated to date. In this study, we investigated the correlation between OS and intermediate endpoints in RCTs of localised osteosarcoma. A systematic search identified 20 relevant RCTs. The correlations between the surrogate endpoints and OS were evaluated using weighted linear regression analyses and by calculating the Spearman rank correlation coefficients (ρ). The strength of the correlation was determined by calculating the coefficient of determination (R2). A total of 5,620 patients were randomly assigned to 45 treatment arms in the eligible 20 RCTs. The correlation between the hazard ratios for EFS and OS was moderate (R2 = 0.456, ρ = 0.440); this correlation tended to be weaker for patients with localised osteosarcoma excluding the patients with metastases. Overall, the trial-level correlation between the surrogate endpoints and OS was not robust in RCTs of osteosarcoma published to date. Hence, the suitability of the intermediate endpoints as surrogates for OS could not be confirmed.

A meta-analytic evaluation of the correlation between event-free survival and overall survival in randomized controlled trials of newly diagnosed Ewing sarcoma

Background

In randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of adjuvant treatment for malignant tumors, event-free survival (EFS) is considered the most acceptable surrogate for overall survival (OS). However, even though EFS has repeatedly been selected as a primary endpoint in RCTs of Ewing sarcoma (ES), the surrogacy of EFS for OS has not been investigated. This study aimed to evaluate the correlation between EFS and OS in RCTs of chemotherapy for newly diagnosed ES using a meta-analytic approach.

Methods

We identified seven RCTs of newly diagnosed ES through a systematic review, and a meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the efficacy and adverse events associated with chemotherapy for previously untreated ES. The correlation between EFS and OS was investigated using weighted linear regression analysis and Spearman rank correlation coefficients (ρ). The strength of the correlation was evaluated using the coefficient of determination (R²).

Results

A total of 3612 patients were randomly assigned to 17 treatment arms in the eligible RCTs. The meta-analysis revealed that the hazard ratios for OS and EFS showed significantly better results in the experimental treatment groups with increasing toxicities. The correlation between the hazard ratios for EFS and OS was good (R² = 0.747, ρ = 0.683), and the correlation tended to be more favorable in cases of localized ES (R² = 0.818, ρ = 0.929).

Conclusions

Overall, the trial-level correlation between EFS and OS was good for newly diagnosed ES and was very good in cases of localized disease. EFS may be a useful endpoint in RCTs of ES chemotherapy, and it is worth verifying using individual patient data.

Different approaches to advanced soft tissue sarcomas depending on treatment line, goal of therapy and histological subtype

Introduction: Although rapid evolution over the past few years in advanced soft tissue sarcoma (STS) management has not been without its challenges, it has brought clarity in several areas.Areas covered: This article summarizes the proceedings of the third edition of the Soft Tissue Sarcoma: Evidence and Experience symposium held March 2019 in Madrid, Spain. An update is provided of current approaches to advanced STS management. Case studies illustrate the role of trabectedin in advanced STS management.Expert opinion: First-line treatment of advanced STS requires distinct therapeutic strategies depending on goal: tumor shrinkage or tumor control. Since all sarcoma patients benefit from active treatment irrespective of age or line of therapy, oncologists have a duty to offer active systemic therapies unless the patient is unfit for treatment or chooses to end active treatment. Beyond the first line, histology becomes increasingly relevant for treatment selection. Agents with activity in specific sarcoma subtypes have been identified. Rare tumors represent a substantial medical need requiring strong international collaboration between research groups, pharmaceutical companies, regulatory agencies, and patients to identify active drugs per subtype. Multidisciplinary care in an expert sarcoma center is the primary means of reducing morbidity and mortality in patients with sarcoma.