Bayesian survival extrapolation for cost-effectiveness analysis: a case study of RELAY for ramucirumab in combination with erlotinib in the treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer

AIM

Increasing trend for progression-free survival (PFS)-based primary endpoint in oncology has led to lack of mature overall survival (OS) data at the time of approval. To address this evidence gap in economic evaluations, we used a joint Bayesian approach to predict survival outcomes using immature OS data from the RELAY trial.

METHODS

Patient data from RELAY and systematic literature review (SLR) of phase 3 randomized clinical trials with hazard ratio (HR) estimates of mature PFS and immature OS were considered. OS and PFS were analyzed individually using a univariate model; bivariate analysis was performed using a joint model based on modified Bayesian normal induced copula estimation model. First, a Bayesian univariate model incorporated informative priors based on predicted HR and acceleration factor for OS and PFS. Second, a Bayesian-based joint model of RELAY PFS and OS data was based on the correlation between PFS and OS established in trials of similar populations. Marginal distribution of PFS was used to estimate the same for OS.

RESULTS

Publications (N = 122) of first-line treatments in patients with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutated non-small cell lung cancer were identified in the SLR, of which 36 trials were linked to RELAY. Twenty-six trials with HR data were used. The univariate model could predict OS with reduced uncertainty compared with the frequentist approach. In the joint model, the marginal OS distribution borrowed strength from the marginal PFS distribution through the established correlation coefficient.

LIMITATIONS

Bayesian approach was successfully used in RELAY analysis but may not be universally applied to oncology trials due to the different associations of OS and PFS and different trial patient populations.

CONCLUSIONS

We demonstrated that both the univariate and joint Bayesian models reduced uncertainty in predicting OS compared to frequentist method. The methodology introduced here will have potential applications in clinical decision-making for other oncology trials.

Phase III study of selpercatinib versus chemotherapy ± pembrolizumab in untreated RET positive non-small-cell lung cancer

Selpercatinib, a novel, highly selective and potent, inhibitor of RET, demonstrated clinically meaningful antitumor activity with manageable toxicity in heavily pretreated and treatment-naive RET fusion-positive non-small-cell lung cancer patients in a Phase I/II clinical trial. LIBRETTO-431 (NCT04194944) is a randomized, global, multicenter, open-label, Phase III trial, evaluating selpercatinib versus carboplatin or cisplatin and pemetrexed chemotherapy with or without pembrolizumab in treatment-naive patients with locally advanced/metastatic RET fusion-positive nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer. The primary end point is progression-free survival by independent review. Key secondary end points include overall survival, response rate, duration of response and progression-free survival. Clinical trial registration: NCT04194944 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

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

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.

Efficacy and Safety of Ramucirumab With Docetaxel Versus Placebo With Docetaxel as Second-Line Treatment of Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Subgroup Analysis According to Patient Age in the REVEL Trial

INTRODUCTION

Ramucirumab, a recombinant human immunoglobulin G1 monoclonal antibody receptor antagonist designed to block the ligand-binding site of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-2 (VEGFR-2), was evaluated as second-line treatment in combination with docetaxel in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer in the REVEL trial (NCT01168973). Ramucirumab significantly improved overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). We report age subgroup analysis results primarily on the basis of a 65-year cutoff.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients were randomized 1:1 to ramucirumab with docetaxel or placebo with docetaxel (n = 1253). Of these, 798 were younger than 65 years (ramucirumab, n = 391; control, n = 407) and 455 were 65 years or older (ramucirumab, n = 237; control, n = 218). Treatment comprised 21-day cycles of 75 mg/m2 docetaxel with 10 mg/kg ramucirumab or placebo. Prespecified age subgroup analyses were performed, including OS, PFS, and objective response rate. Quintiles age analysis was conducted to establish a relationship between efficacy and age. The Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) measured quality of life outcomes. Safety was assessed according to adverse events (AEs).

RESULTS

Patients younger than 65 years showed favorable OS outcomes with ramucirumab treatment (hazard ratio [HR], 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.62-0.87; P < .001) and PFS (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.59-0.79; P < .001). In patients 65 years or older, benefits of ramucirumab were not as evident; after model adjustment for prognostic factors, OS and PFS HRs were 0.96 (95% CI, 0.77-1.21; P = .04) and 0.87 (95% CI, 0.71-1.05; P = .03), respectively. Age analysis according to quintiles showed HRs favoring ramucirumab for all age groupings. LCSS scores and AEs did not considerably differ between age groups.

CONCLUSION

In this subgroup analysis, true treatment effect differences on the basis of age have not been established, and treatment should not be deterred solely because of age.

Association of baseline absolute neutrophil counts and survival in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer treated with second-line antiangiogenic therapies: exploratory analyses of the RAISE trial and validation in an electronic medical record data set

BACKGROUND

In the RAISE trial, ramucirumab+leucovorin/fluorouracil/irinotecan (FOLFIRI) improved the median overall survival (mOS) of patients with previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer versus patients treated with placebo+FOLFIRI but had a higher incidence of neutropaenia, leading to more chemotherapy dose modifications and discontinuations. Thus, we conducted an exploratory post-hoc analysis of RAISE and a retrospective, observational analysis of electronic medical record (EMR) data to determine and verify the association of neutropaenia, baseline absolute neutrophil count (ANC) and survival.

METHODS

The RAISE analysis used the study safety population (n=1057). IMS Health Oncology Database (IMS EMR) was the source for the real-world data set (n=617).

RESULTS

RAISE patients with treatment-emergent neutropaenia had improved mOS compared with those without (ramucirumab arm: 16.1 vs 10.7 months, HR=0.57, p<0.0001; placebo arm: 12.7 vs 10.7 months, HR=0.76, p=0.0065). RAISE patients with low ANC versus high baseline ANC also had longer mOS (ramucirumab arm: 15.2 vs 8.9 months, HR=0.49, p<0.0001; placebo arm: 13.2 vs 7.3 months, HR=0.50, p<0.0001). The results were similar for IMS EMR low versus high baseline ANC (bevacizumab+FOLFIRI patients: 14.9 vs 7.7 months, HR=0.59, p<0.0001; FOLFIRI alone: 14.6 vs 5.4 months, HR=0.37, p<0.0001). Patients in the RAISE trial with low baseline ANC were more likely to develop neutropaenia (OR: ramucirumab arm=2.62, p<0.0001; placebo arm=2.16, p=0.0003).

CONCLUSION

Neutropaenia during treatment, and subsequent dose modifications or discontinuations, do not compromise treatment efficacy. Baseline ANC is a strong prognostic factor for survival and is associated with treatment-emergent neutropaenia in the analysed population.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT01183780, Results.

Antiangiogenic therapy for patients with aggressive or refractory advanced non-small cell lung cancer in the second-line setting

A majority of patients with advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) will experience disease progression after first-line therapy. Patients who have advanced NSCLC that is especially aggressive, which is defined as disease that rapidly progresses on first-line treatment or disease that is refractory to first-line treatment, have a critical unmet medical need. These patients have a poor prognosis in the second-line setting. Several studies have recently shown that treatment with an antiangiogenic therapy may benefit these patients. This review summarizes the approved antiangiogenic therapies for the treatment of patients with advanced NSCLC in the second-line setting, specifically focusing on the outcomes from subgroups of patients with rapidly progressing or refractory disease. Several antiangiogenic agents, as monotherapy or in combination with other treatments, have been or are currently being studied in patients with advanced NSCLC. Antiangiogenics that are approved for use in patients with advanced NSCLC are limited to bevacizumab in combination with chemotherapy (nonsquamous NSCLC), ramucirumab in combination with docetaxel (all histologies), and nintedanib in combination with docetaxel (adenocarcinoma histology). This review focuses on the efficacy, safety, and quality of life outcomes in the subpopulation of patients with rapidly progressing or refractory NSCLC treated with approved antiangiogenic therapies in the second-line setting. We also discuss the impact of newly approved immunotherapy agents on the outcomes of patients with aggressive or refractory disease. Studies in progress and planned future research will determine if combination treatment with antiangiogenics and immunotherapies will benefit patients with aggressive, advanced NSCLC.

Meta-analysis of individual patient safety data from six randomized, placebo-controlled trials with the antiangiogenic VEGFR2-binding monoclonal antibody ramucirumab

BACKGROUND

Ramucirumab, the human immunoglobulin G1 monoclonal antibody receptor antagonist of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 2, has been approved for treating gastric/gastroesophageal junction, non-small-cell lung, and metastatic colorectal cancers. With the completion of six global, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase III trials across multiple tumor types, an opportunity now exists to further establish the safety parameters of ramucirumab across a large patient population.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An individual patient meta-analysis across the six completed phase III trials was conducted and the relative risk (RR) and associated 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were derived using fixed-effects or mixed-effects models for all-grade and high-grade adverse events (AEs) possibly related to vascular endothelial growth factor pathway inhibition. The number needed to harm was also calculable due to the placebo-controlled nature of all six registration standard trials.

RESULTS

A total of 4996 treated patients (N = 2748 in the ramucirumab arm and N = 2248 in the control, placebo arm) were included in this meta-analysis. Arterial thromboembolic events [ATE; all-grade, RR: 0.8, 95% CI 0.5-1.3; high-grade (grade ≥3), RR: 0.9, 95% CI 0.5-1.7], venous thromboembolic events (VTE; all-grade, RR: 0.7, 95% CI 0.5-1.1; high-grade, RR: 0.7, 95% CI 0.4-1.2), high-grade bleeding (RR: 1.1, 95% CI 0.8-1.5), and high-grade gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding (RR: 1.1, 95% CI 0.7-1.7) did not demonstrate a definite increased risk with ramucirumab. A higher percentage of hypertension, proteinuria, low-grade (grade 1-2) bleeding, GI perforation, infusion-related reaction, and wound-healing complications were observed in the ramucirumab arm compared with the control arm.

CONCLUSIONS

Ramucirumab may be distinct among antiangiogenic agents in terms of ATE, VTE, high-grade bleeding, or high-grade GI bleeding by showing no clear evidence for an increased risk of these AEs in this meta-analysis of a large and diverse patient population. Ramucirumab is consistent with other angiogenic inhibitors in the risk of developing certain AEs. Clinical Trial Numbers: NCT00917384 (REGARD), NCT01170663 (RAINBOW), NCT01168973 (REVEL), NCT01183780 (RAISE), NCT01140347 (REACH), and NCT00703326 (ROSE).

Outcomes in patients with aggressive or refractory disease from REVEL: A randomized phase III study of docetaxel with ramucirumab or placebo for second-line treatment of stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer

OBJECTIVES

The REVEL study demonstrated improved efficacy for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer treated with ramucirumab plus docetaxel, independent of histology. This exploratory analysis characterized the treatment effect in REVEL patients who were refractory to prior first-line treatment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Refractory patients had a best response of progressive disease to first-line treatment. Endpoints included overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), quality of life (QoL), and safety. Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards regression were performed for OS and PFS, and Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test was used for response. QoL was assessed with the Lung Cancer Symptom Scale. Sensitivity analyses were performed on subgroups of the intent-to-treat population with limited time on first-line therapy.

RESULTS

Of 1253 randomized patients in REVEL, 360 (29%) were refractory to first-line treatment. Baseline characteristics were largely balanced between treatment arms. In the control arm, median OS for refractory patients was 6.3 versus 10.3 months for patients not meeting this criterion, demonstrating the poor prognosis of refractory patients. Median OS (8.3 vs. 6.3 months; HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.68-1.08), median PFS (4.0 vs. 2.5 months; HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.57-0.88), and ORR (22.5% vs. 12.6%) were improved in refractory patients treated with ramucirumab compared to placebo, without new safety concerns or further deteriorating patient QoL.

CONCLUSIONS

The effect of ramucirumab in refractory patients is similar to that in the intent-to-treat population. The benefit/risk profile for refractory patients suggests that ramucirumab plus docetaxel is an appropriate treatment option even in this difficult-to-treat population.

Prognostic Factor Analysis of Overall Survival in Gastric Cancer from Two Phase III Studies of Second-line Ramucirumab (REGARD and RAINBOW) Using Pooled Patient Data

PURPOSE

To identify baseline prognostic factors for survival in patients with disease progression, during or after chemotherapy for the treatment of advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We pooled data from patients randomized between 2009 and 2012 in 2 phase III, global double-blind studies of ramucirumab for the treatment of advanced gastric or GEJ adenocarcinoma following disease progression on first-line platinum- and/or fluoropyrimidine-containing therapy (REGARD and RAINBOW). Forty-one key baseline clinical and laboratory factors common in both studies were examined. Model building started with covariate screening using univariate Cox models (significance level=0.05). A stepwise multivariable Cox model identified the final prognostic factors (entry+exit significance level=0.01). Cox models were stratified by treatment and geographic region. The process was repeated to identify baseline prognostic quality of life (QoL) parameters.

RESULTS

Of 1,020 randomized patients, 953 (93%) patients without any missing covariates were included in the analysis. We identified 12 independent prognostic factors of poor survival: 1) peritoneal metastases; 2) Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance score 1; 3) the presence of a primary tumor; 4) time to progression since prior therapy <6 months; 5) poor/unknown tumor differentiation; abnormally low blood levels of 6) albumin, 7) sodium, and/or 8) lymphocytes; and abnormally high blood levels of 9) neutrophils, 10) aspartate aminotransferase (AST), 11) alkaline phosphatase (ALP), and/or 12) lactate dehydrogenase (LDH). Factors were used to devise a 4-tier prognostic index (median overall survival [OS] by risk [months]: high=3.4, moderate=6.4, medium=9.9, and low=14.5; Harrell's C-index=0.66; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.64-0.68). Addition of QoL to the model identified patient-reported appetite loss as an independent prognostic factor.

CONCLUSIONS

The identified prognostic factors and the reported prognostic index may help clinical decision-making, patient stratification, and planning of future clinical studies.

On the Interpretation of the Hazard Ratio and Communication of Survival Benefit

This brief communication will clarify the difference between a relative hazard and a relative risk. We highlight the importance of this difference, and demonstrate in practical terms that 1 minus the hazard ratio should not be interpreted as a risk reduction in the commonly understood sense of the term. This article aims to provide a better understanding of the type of risk reduction that a hazard ratio implies, thereby clarifying the intent in the communication among practitioners and researchers and establishing an accurate and realistic foundation for communicating with patients. The Oncologist 2017;22:484-486.

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III study of cisplatin plus a fluoropyrimidine with or without ramucirumab as first-line therapy in patients with metastatic gastric or gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma (RAINFALL, NCT02314117)

TPS178

Background: Ramucirumab, a human IgG1 monoclonal antibody directed to the ectodomain of VEGFR-2, prevents ligand binding to the receptor, blocking activation of downstream receptor-mediated pathways. Ramucirumab has demonstrated significant improvement in overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in 2 phase III registration studies (REGARD, RAINBOW) in patients in second-line treatment of gastric cancer. This global phase III trial will compare PFS in patients with HER2-negative, metastatic gastric or GEJ adenocarcinoma receiving ramucirumab with cisplatin/capecitabine (or 5-FU) versus placebo with cisplatin/capecitabine (or 5-FU) as first-line treatment. The trial is conducted in 137 sites in the Americas, Europe and Japan and is currently open to enrollment. Methods: Eligible patients will be randomized to receive ramucirumab (8mg/kg on days 1 and 8, based upon population pharmacokinetic modelling) or placebo with cisplatin/capecitabine every 21-day cycle until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or other withdrawal criteria are met. The primary endpoint is PFS; OS is the key secondary endpoint. Efficacy will be considered at 3 analysis points: futility analysis for PFS, primary analysis of PFS & final analysis of OS. A gatekeeping strategy will be used to assess PFS and OS. The OS endpoint will only be tested if the PFS test is significant to control Type I error at 5% across both endpoints. An exposure/safety analysis will be done after 60 patients have started the 3rd cycle. The study has 90% power to demonstrate a PFS advantage assuming HR = 0.70 and 80% power to demonstrate an OS advantage assuming HR = 0.77. Other secondary endpoints include PFS2 (the time from randomization to disease progression after the start of additional systemic anticancer treatment, or death from any cause, whichever occurs first), objective response rate, safety and quality of life. As of 9/11/2015, 128 patients have been enrolled in 19 countries. The 1st exposure/safety analysis is underway. Clinical trial information: NCT02314117.

Ramucirumab plus docetaxel versus placebo plus docetaxel for second-line treatment of stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer after disease progression on platinum-based therapy (REVEL): a multicentre, double-blind, randomised phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

Ramucirumab is a human IgG1 monoclonal antibody that targets the extracellular domain of VEGFR-2. We aimed to assess efficacy and safety of treatment with docetaxel plus ramucirumab or placebo as second-line treatment for patients with stage IV non-small-cell-lung cancer (NSCLC) after platinum-based therapy.

METHODS

In this multicentre, double-blind, randomised phase 3 trial (REVEL), we enrolled patients with squamous or non-squamous NSCLC who had progressed during or after a first-line platinum-based chemotherapy regimen. Patients were randomly allocated (1:1) with a centralised, interactive voice-response system (stratified by sex, region, performance status, and previous maintenance therapy [yes vs no]) to receive docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) and either ramucirumab (10 mg/kg) or placebo on day 1 of a 21 day cycle until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, withdrawal, or death. The primary endpoint was overall survival in all patients allocated to treatment. We assessed adverse events according to treatment received. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01168973.

FINDINGS

Between Dec 3, 2010, and Jan 24, 2013, we screened 1825 patients, of whom 1253 patients were randomly allocated to treatment. Median overall survival was 10·5 months (IQR 5·1-21·2) for 628 patients allocated ramucirumab plus docetaxel and 9·1 months (4·2-18·0) for 625 patients who received placebo plus docetaxel (hazard ratio 0·86, 95% CI 0·75-0·98; p=0·023). Median progression-free survival was 4·5 months (IQR 2·3-8·3) for the ramucirumab group compared with 3·0 months (1·4-6·9) for the control group (0·76, 0·68-0·86; p<0·0001). We noted treatment-emergent adverse events in 613 (98%) of 627 patients in the ramucirumab safety population and 594 (95%) of 618 patients in the control safety population. The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events were neutropenia (306 patients [49%] in the ramucirumab group vs 246 [40%] in the control group), febrile neutropenia (100 [16%] vs 62 [10%]), fatigue (88 [14%] vs 65 [10%]), leucopenia (86 [14%] vs 77 [12%]), and hypertension (35 [6%] vs 13 [2%]). The numbers of deaths from adverse events (31 [5%] vs 35 [6%]) and grade 3 or worse pulmonary haemorrhage (eight [1%] vs eight [1%]) did not differ between groups. Toxicities were manageable with appropriate dose reductions and supportive care.

INTERPRETATION

Ramucirumab plus docetaxel improves survival as second-line treatment of patients with stage IV NSCLC.

FUNDING

Eli Lilly.

Predictive probability of success and the assessment of futility in large outcomes trials

We consider a class of futility rules based on a Bayesian approach for computing the predictive probability of success for large clinical trials, given a certain amount of observed data. This paper focuses on outcomes trials in particular, thus we are concerned with binary response variables. The proposed method determines the likelihood of observing a statistically significant treatment effect at the end of a study, conditional on the data observed at an interim time point and assuming that event rates governing future observations follow beta distributions. In particular, the prior distributions for the event rates of interest are updated based on the observed data at an interim time point, such that means and variances are intuitive functions of the data. Computational aspects will be discussed for the case in which event counts are functions of sample size and event rates only, and for situations in which they are functions of sample size, event rates, and exposure duration. We will discuss appropriate thresholds for declaring futility based on this approach, and the potential impact of overdispersion, a common phenomenon particularly in global outcomes trials.

International integrated database for the evaluation of severe sepsis and drotrecogin alfa (activated) therapy: 28-day survival and safety

PURPOSE

To enhance the understanding of severe sepsis, a database of patients from multiple clinical trials spanning a 6-year period was constructed. Initial analyses evaluated the 28-day survival in the placebo group and further assessed the treatment effect of drotrecogin alfa (activated) (DrotAA).

METHODS

Five severe sepsis studies with similar entry criteria were combined, and baseline characteristics and 28-day mortality were evaluated (4459 severe sepsis patients; placebo, n = 1231; DrotAA, n = 3228). An integrated data analysis with propensity score adjustment was performed. Twenty-one variables selected by stepwise logistic regression were included in a propensity score of differences between the 2 groups of patients.

RESULTS

Over the 6-year period of these trials, there was no change in placebo mortality rates overall (P = .67), nor in subgroups of Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation score >/=25 (P = .73) or multiple organ dysfunction (P = .38). The adjusted relative hazard risk for DrotAA patients was 0.84 (95% confidence interval, 0.73-0.95; P = .007). Serious bleeding (0.8% in placebo vs 3.5% in DrotAA, P < .0001) was increased during the DrotAA infusion period.

CONCLUSIONS

Initial analyses indicate that placebo mortality remained unchanged over a recent 6-year period. These analyses also further substantiate that treatment with DrotAA is associated with improved survival.

International INtegrated Database for the Evaluation of severe sePsis and drotrecogin alfa (activated) THerapy: component trials and statistical methods for INDEPTH

OBJECTIVES

To better understand the effects of drotrecogin alfa (activated) (DrotAA) in severe sepsis patients, and the natural progression of severe sepsis, by creating a database of severe sepsis patients using the appropriate statistical analysis methods to integrate data from various trials.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patient-level data from five severe sepsis trials, conducted by the same sponsor (Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN, USA), were combined in an integrated database. Patients from various studies were included and received either DrotAA at 24 microg/kg/h for 96 hours (n = 3228) or placebo (n = 1231), in addition to standard supportive care. The following adjustments to the analyses were made to allow for the combined, and thus non-randomized, nature of the data: (1) differences in observed outcomes between studies were investigated to assess the extent of study-to-study variation before combining study-level data across trials for statistical analysis; (2) random study effects were included in models for patient-level data to capture potential extraneous study-to-study variation; and (3) propensity scores were computed and included as covariates in models for patient-level data to adjust for the nonrandomized nature of the data.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics were similar across the studies, supporting the combination of study-level data across trials. Comparing aggregate event rates between the two treatment arms yielded a relative risk for mortality (DrotAA versus placebo) of 0.79 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.71-0.88), p < 0.0001. For patient-level analyses, after adjustment for 13 independent variables and random study effects, the odds ratio for mortality in the DrotAA versus placebo patients was 0.71 (95% CI 0.59-0.86), p = 0.0003. With adjustment for 13 independent variables and propensity score, the odds ratio was 0.79 (95% CI 0.67-0.93), p = 0.006. Limitations of this integrated database include the modest total number of the trials in the database and the fact that only one component trial in the database contributed data from both placebo and DrotAA-treated patients.

SUMMARY

A robust severe sepsis database was developed which will be suitable for future studies on the progression of severe sepsis and the mechanism of action of DrotAA. Initial analysis of data from INDEPTH provides additional evidence that treatment of severe sepsis patients with DrotAA is associated with a sustained survival advantage throughout 28-day follow-up.

Lack of evidence for qualitative treatment by disease severity interactions in clinical studies of severe sepsis

INTRODUCTION

The design of clinical trials of interventions aimed at reducing mortality in patients with severe sepsis assumes that the relative treatment effect of the intervention is independent of the patients' risk for death. We reviewed published data from phase III clinical studies of severe sepsis to determine whether a relationship exists between risk for death and the relative benefit of the investigational agent. Such an interaction might warrant a change in the assumptions that underlie current trial designs.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of published phase III, randomized, placebo-controlled trials in adult patients with sepsis, severe sepsis, or septic shock up to November 2004. All studies enrolled patients with known or suspected infection, evidence of a systemic response to the infection, and one or more organ dysfunctions resulting from the systemic response.

RESULTS

Twenty-two publications, investigating 17 molecular entities, fulfilled criteria for phase III or equivalent studies aimed at reducing mortality in adult patients with severe sepsis or septic shock. Three studies achieved the prospectively defined primary end-point of a statistically significant reduction in 28-day all-cause mortality. The control group mortality rates for these studies were 31%, 43% and 61%, indicating that the beneficial effects of adjunct therapies could be demonstrated over a wide range of illness severity. Analysis of subgroup data from failed studies provided no evidence that the efficacy of the therapeutics being investigated varied by baseline placebo mortality rates. Among all studies, interventions with anticoagulant activity or anti-inflammatory activity did not appear to be harmful in patients with evidence of less coagulopathy or less inflammation.

CONCLUSION

Our review of published clinical data does not support the hypothesis that mortality risk of the population studied alters the relative treatment effect associated with anti-inflammatory or other agents used to treat severe sepsis. Clinical studies in severe sepsis should continue to enroll patients over a wide range of disease severity, as long as patients enrolled have evidence of sepsis-induced organ dysfunction(s), patients are at an appreciable risk for death (e.g. as evidenced by admission to an intensive care unit), and the potential for benefit outweighs the potential for harm.

Year-by-year analysis of cardiovascular events in the Multiple Outcomes of Raloxifene Evaluation (MORE) trial

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effect of raloxifene 60 mg/day (RLX) on year-by-year cardiovascular (CV) events in postmenopausal women participating in the Multiple Outcomes of Raloxifene Evaluation (MORE) trial, a double-blind, placebo-controlled osteoporosis treatment trial.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Post hoc analysis, using data from participants receiving placebo (N = 2576) or RLX 60 mg/day (N = 2557) in MORE, was performed to determine the relative risk (RR, 95% CI) of CV events in each individual trial year. Analyses were performed for the overall cohort and for women in high and low risk subsets. Women were retrospectively assessed as high CV risk using established criteria and the remaining women were considered low CV risk.

RESULTS

The incidence of CV events did not differ between the RLX and placebo groups in the overall cohort (RR 0.86, 95% Cl 0.64-1.15), or the low CV risk subset (RR 1.01, 95% Cl 0.70-1.46). In the high-risk subset, the incidence of CV events was less in the RLX group (RR 0.60, 95% Cl 0.38-0.95). There was no significant increase in CV risk during any single year in the RLX group for either the overall cohort or the low or high CV risk subsets.

CONCLUSION

In this post hoc analysis, the risk of CV events was not increased in any single year of MORE in women taking RLX, either in the overall cohort or in the low and high CV risk subsets.

Risk-benefit profile for raloxifene: 4-year data From the Multiple Outcomes of Raloxifene Evaluation (MORE) randomized trial

Posthoc analysis of the MORE osteoporosis treatment trial assessed risk-benefit profile of raloxifene in 7705 postmenopausal women. A major disease outcomes global index resulted in annual rates of 1.39% and 1.83% in the raloxifene and placebo groups, respectively (HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.62-0.92), compatible with a favorable risk-benefit profile for raloxifene for treating postmenopausal osteoporosis.

INTRODUCTION

The Women's Health Initiative (WHI) trial reported overall risks that exceeded benefits from use of estrogen-progestin in healthy postmenopausal women. The objective of this posthoc analysis of the Multiple Outcomes of Raloxifene Evaluation (MORE) trial was to assess the safety profile of raloxifene, a selective estrogen receptor modulator indicated for the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis, using the global index method from the WHI trial.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 7705 postmenopausal women (mean age, 67 years) were enrolled in the MORE osteoporosis treatment trial and randomly assigned to receive placebo or one of two doses of raloxifene (60 or 120 mg/day) for 4 years. A global index of clinical outcomes, defined as described for the WHI trial (the earliest occurrence of coronary heart disease, stroke, pulmonary embolism, invasive breast cancer, endometrial cancer, colorectal cancer, hip fracture, or death because of other causes) was applied to the MORE trial data. Physicians blinded to treatment assignment adjudicated events. Intention-to-treat survival analysis of time-to-first-event was performed using a proportional hazards model.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

The annualized rate of global index events was 1.83% in the placebo group and 1.39% in the combined raloxifene dose groups (hazard ratio [HR], 0.75; 95% CI, 0.62-0.92). Analyzing individual dose groups separately yielded the same results (HR for 60 mg/day, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.60-0.96: HR for 120 mg/day, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.59-0.95). Subgroup analyses showed no significant interactions between age or hysterectomy status and the effect of raloxifene on the global index (interaction p > 0.1), whereas the global index risk reduction seemed to be greater in obese women compared with nonobese women (interaction p = 0.03). The significant 25% reduction in global index is compatible with a favorable risk-benefit safety profile when raloxifene is used for osteoporosis treatment in postmenopausal women. These results require confirmation in ongoing clinical trials.

Post hoc analysis of data from the Multiple Outcomes of Raloxifene Evaluation (MORE) trial on the effects of three years of raloxifene treatment on glycemic control and cardiovascular disease risk factors in women with and without type 2 diabetes

BACKGROUND

The long-term effects of the selective estrogen-receptor modulator raloxifene hydrochloride on glycemic control and markers of cardiovascular disease risk in postmenopausal women with type 2 diabetes mellitus are unknown.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this analysis was to compare the effects of 3-year treatment with raloxifene 60 mg/d versus placebo on glycemic control and markers of cardiovascular disease risk in osteoporotic postmenopausal women with and without type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

In this analysis, we included women from the Multiple Outcomes of Raloxifene Evaluation trial (a multicenter, double-masked trial) who were randomized to receive raloxifene 60 mg/d (n = 2557) or placebo (n = 2576). Baseline and 36-month fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and total cholesterol (TC) were measured for all participants. Glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), triglycerides (TGs), apolipoprotein (apo) A-I, apo B, and fibrinogen were assessed in approximately 1800 participants from selected larger sites.

RESULTS

At baseline, 202 of all 5133 women (3.9%) had type 2 diabetes. Of the approximately 1800 women who were assessed for HbA1c, LDL-C, TGs, apo A-I, apo B, and fibrinogen, 70 (3.9%) had type 2 diabetes at baseline. Compared with placebo, raloxifene did not significantly affect HbA1c, FPG, HDL-C, or TGs in women with or without diabetes. Raloxifene produced statistically significant reductions in TC, LDL-C, and fibrinogen both in women with diabetes (all P < or = 0.004) and without diabetes (all P < 0.001). Raloxifene significantly increased apo A-I (P < 0.001) and reduced apo B (P < 0.001) in women without diabetes. In the raloxifene-treated group, body weight increased by a mean 0.31 kg (P < 0.001) in women without diabetes.

CONCLUSIONS

In osteoporotic postmenopausal women with or without type 2 diabetes, raloxifene 60 mg/d did not affect glycemic control and had favorable effects on TC, LDL-C, and fibrinogen levels.

Baseline characteristics of participants in the Raloxifene Use for The Heart (RUTH) trial

The Raloxifene Use for The Heart (RUTH) trial is a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial designed to determine whether raloxifene 60 mg/day compared with placebo lowers the risk of coronary events (coronary death, nonfatal myocardial infarction [MI], or hospitalized acute coronary syndromes other than MI) and reduces the risk of invasive breast cancer in women at risk for a major coronary event. Raloxifene is a selective estrogen receptor modulator that improves cardiovascular risk factors, reduces the risk of vertebral fracture, and is associated with a reduced incidence of invasive breast cancer in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. Between June 1998 and August 2000, 10,101 women were enrolled at 187 sites in 26 countries. Approximately half of the women had documented coronary heart disease (CHD) (n = 5,031); the remainder had multiple CHD risk factors that increased their risk for a CHD event (n = 5,070). The mean age of participants was 68 years (39% were >70 years old), and did not differ between those with documented CHD and those at increased CHD risk. Most women were Caucasian (84%); 60% had a body mass index >/=27 kg/m(2), 46% had diabetes mellitus, 78% had systemic hypertension, and 14% had low-density lipoprotein cholesterol >160 mg/dl. Compared with women at increased CHD risk, women with documented CHD had higher cardiovascular risk scores, a higher prevalence of abnormal electrocardiograms, greater use of cardiovascular medications, were more likely to have had cardiac rehabilitation, and were more likely to have previously used estrogen or oral contraceptives, but had a slightly lower prevalence of CHD risk factors such as smoking, obesity, diabetes mellitus, and systemic hypertension, and had lower serum levels of total and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol. The RUTH cohort is the largest group of postmenopausal women at increased risk of CHD events ever assembled in a clinical trial, and is the first trial designed to determine the effect of a selective estrogen receptor modulator on the risk of CHD events.

Raloxifene and cardiovascular events in osteoporotic postmenopausal women: four-year results from the MORE (Multiple Outcomes of Raloxifene Evaluation) randomized trial

CONTEXT

Raloxifene, a selective estrogen receptor modulator, improves cardiovascular risk factors, but its effect on cardiovascular events is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effect of raloxifene on cardiovascular events in osteoporotic postmenopausal women.

DESIGN

Secondary analysis of data from the Multiple Outcomes of Raloxifene Evaluation trial, a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial conducted between November 1994 and September 1999.

SETTING

Outpatient and community settings at 180 sites in 25 countries.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 7705 osteoporotic postmenopausal women (mean age, 67 years).

INTERVENTION

Patients were randomly assigned to receive raloxifene, 60 mg/d (n = 2557), or 120 mg/d (n = 2572), or placebo (n = 2576) for 4 years.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Cardiovascular events, including coronary events (myocardial infarction, unstable angina, or coronary ischemia) and cerebrovascular events (stroke or transient ischemic attack), collected as safety end points and subsequently adjudicated by a cardiologist blinded to therapy. Cardiovascular risk at study entry was determined by the presence of multiple cardiovascular risk factors or prior coronary events or revascularization procedure.

RESULTS

In the overall cohort, there were no significant differences between treatment groups in the number of combined coronary and cerebrovascular events: 96 (3.7%) with placebo, 82 (3.2%) with 60 mg/d of raloxifene, and 94 (3.7%) with 120 mg/d of raloxifene. Relative risks (RRs) were 0.86 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.64-1.15) and 0.98 (95% CI, 0.74-1.30) for 60 mg/d and 120 mg/d of raloxifene, respectively. Similar results were obtained when coronary and cerebrovascular events were analyzed separately. Among the subset of 1035 women with increased cardiovascular risk at baseline, those assigned to raloxifene had a significantly lower risk of cardiovascular events compared with placebo (RR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.38-0.95 for both raloxifene groups). The number of cardiovascular events during the first year was not significantly different across groups in the overall cohort (P =.94), or among women at increased cardiovascular risk (P =.86) or with evidence of established coronary heart disease (P =.60).

CONCLUSIONS

Raloxifene therapy for 4 years did not significantly affect the risk of cardiovascular events in the overall cohort but did significantly reduce the risk of cardiovascular events in the subset of women with increased cardiovascular risk. There was no evidence that raloxifene caused an early increase in risk of cardiovascular events. Before raloxifene is used for prevention of cardiovascular events, these findings require confirmation in trials with evaluation of cardiovascular outcomes as the primary objective.

Raloxifene does not affect insulin sensitivity or glycemic control in postmenopausal women with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a randomized clinical trial

Little is known about the metabolic or cardiovascular effects of selective ER modulators (SERMs), such as raloxifene hydrochloride (RLX), in postmenopausal women with type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM). Therefore, the effect of RLX vs. placebo (PL) on glycemic control, insulin sensitivity, as well as effects on a number of hormone, lipid, coagulation, and safety factors were determined in 30 postmenopausal women with type 2 DM in a randomized, double blind, cross-over trial. All participants had a SHBG serum concentration below 60 nmol/liter at baseline and had stable diabetes controlled by either oral hypoglycemic agents or diet for 1 month. In the first treatment period, participants received 12 wk of either PL or RLX, followed by an 8-wk washout before the second treatment period. In the second treatment period, participants were crossed over to the other treatment. Compared with PL, RLX did not significantly affect fasting blood glucose, hemoglobin A(1c), lipids, fasting insulin, or insulin sensitivity (as measured by the euglycemic clamp technique). Compared with PL, RLX reduced fibrinogen levels by 0.77 g/liter (P < 0.001), IGF-I by 2.4 nmol/liter (P < 0.001), and free T by 0.73 pmol/liter (P = 0.038) and increased SHBG by 5.5 nmol/liter (P = 0.001) and IGF-binding protein-3 by 0.57 ng/ml (P = 0.007). Our results demonstrate that RLX does not significantly affect glycemic control and has favorable or neutral effects on selected surrogate markers of cardiovascular risk in postmenopausal women with type 2 diabetes mellitus while decreasing hyperandrogenicity in these patients.

Effects of raloxifene and hormone replacement therapy on markers of serum atherogenicity in healthy postmenopausal women

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effect of raloxifene (RLX) and hormone replacement therapy (HRT) on non-high density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C) levels and the apolipoprotein-B/apolipoprotein-A1 (apo-B/apo-A1) concentration ratio, markers of serum atherogenicity, in postmenopausal women.

METHODS

Three hundred and ninety healthy postmenopausal women aged 45-72 years were enrolled in a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel trial at eight outpatient sites in the United States. Women were randomly assigned to receive continuous combined HRT (0.625 mg/day conjugated equine estrogen and 2.5 mg/day medroxyprogesterone acetate), 60 or 120 mg/day raloxifene, or placebo for 6 months. Serum concentrations of non-HDL cholesterol and the apo-B/apo-A1 concentration ratio were measured in serum samples obtained at baseline and at 6 months of treatment.

RESULTS

At 6 months, non-HDL-C and apo-B/apo-A1 were significantly reduced by 60 mg/day RLX (10 and 11%, respectively), 120 mg/day RLX (9 and 12%, respectively) and HRT (10 and 12%, respectively), compared with placebo. The effect of all treatments to lower non-HDL-C and apo-B/apo-A1 was greatest in women with hypercholesterolemia (total-C>240 mg/dl) at baseline. Among women with undesirable (>160 mg/dl) non-HDL cholesterol at baseline, RLX and HRT lowered the percentage of these women remaining above this threshold after 6 months (placebo, 89%; 60 mg/day RLX, 61%; 120 mg/day RLX, 74%; HRT, 58%). Similar results were observed for women with high (>190 mg/dl) non-HDL cholesterol at baseline.

CONCLUSION

In healthy postmenopausal women, RLX and HRT lower serum non-HDL-C and apo-B/apo-A1, indicators of serum atherogenicity, to a similar extent.

Indicators of lifetime estrogen exposure: effect on breast cancer incidence and interaction with raloxifene therapy in the multiple outcomes of raloxifene evaluation study participants

PURPOSE

To test the hypothesis that risk factors related to lifetime estrogen exposure predict breast cancer incidence and to test if any subgroups experience enhanced benefit from raloxifene.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Postmenopausal women with osteoporosis (N = 7,705), enrolled onto the Multiple Outcomes of Raloxifene Evaluation (MORE) trial, were randomly assigned to receive placebo, raloxifene 60 mg/d, or raloxifene 120 mg/d for 4 years. Breast cancer risk was analyzed by the following baseline characteristics indicative of estrogen exposure: previous hormone replacement therapy, prevalent vertebral fractures, family history of breast cancer, estradiol level, bone mineral density (BMD), body mass index, and age at menopause. Therapy-by-subgroup interactions were assessed using a logistic regression model.

RESULTS

Overall, women with the highest one-third estradiol levels (> or = 12 pmol/L) had a 2.07-fold increased invasive breast cancer risk compared with women with lower levels. Raloxifene significantly reduced breast cancer risk in both the low- and high-estrogen subgroups for all risk factors examined (P <.05 for each comparison). The women with the highest BMD and those with a family history of breast cancer experienced a significantly greater therapy benefit with raloxifene, compared with the two thirds of patients with lower BMD or those without a family history, respectively; the subgroup-by-therapy interactions were significant (P =.005 and P =.015, respectively).

CONCLUSION

The MORE trial confirms that increased lifetime estrogen exposure increases breast cancer risk. Raloxifene therapy reduces breast cancer risk in postmenopausal osteoporotic women regardless of lifetime estrogen exposure, but the reduction is greater in those with higher lifetime exposure to estrogen.