Comparing duration of response and duration of clinical benefit between fulvestrant treatment groups in the CONFIRM trial: Application of new methodology

Breast Cancer Research and Treatment

Volumn 138, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 149-155

  Garnett, Sally Anne ^a   Martin, Miguel ^b   Jerusalem, Guy ^c   Petruzelka, Lubos ^d   Torres, Roberto ^e   Bondarenko, Igor N ^f   Khasanov, Rustem ^g   Verhoeven, Didier ^h   Pedrini, José L ⁱ   Smirnova, Iva ^j   Lichinitser, Mikhail R ^k   Pendergrass, Kelly ^l   Lindemann, Justin P O ^a   Di Leo, Angelo ^m  

^a ASTRAZENECA   (United Kingdom)

^b HOSPITAL GENERAL UNIVERSITARIO GREGORIO MARAÑÓN   (Spain)

^c UNIVERSITY OF LIÈGE   (Belgium)

^d CHARLES UNIVERSITY   (Czech Republic)

^e Institute Nacional del Cáncer   (Chile)

^f Dnipropetrovsk Regional Clinical Ophthalmologic Hospital   (Ukraine)

^g Republican Clinical Oncological Dispensary   (Russian Federation)

^h Algemeen Ziekenhuis Klina   (Belgium)

ⁱ HOSPITAL NOSSA SENHORA DA CONCEIÇÃO   (Brazil)

^j Medical Radiology Reseach Center   (Russian Federation)

^k N N BLOKHIN RUSSIAN CANCER RESEARCH CENTER   (Russian Federation)

^l Kansas City Cancer Center   (United States)

^m HOSPITAL OF PRATO   (Italy)

more..

Author keywords

Advanced breast cancer; Comparison; Duration of clinical benefit; Duration of response; Fulvestrant; Methodology

Indexed keywords

FULVESTRANT; PLACEBO;

ADVANCED CANCER; ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; BREAST METASTASIS; CANCER CHEMOTHERAPY; COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS; CONTROLLED STUDY; DOSE RESPONSE; DOUBLE BLIND PROCEDURE; DRUG DOSE COMPARISON; DRUG EFFICACY; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; METASTASIS; PHASE 3 CLINICAL TRIAL; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; TREATMENT DURATION;

EID: 84874659911     PISSN: 01676806     EISSN: 15737217     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10549-012-2395-8     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Howell A, Osborne CK, Morris C, Wakeling AE (2000) ICI 182,780 (Faslodex): development of a novel, "pure" antiestrogen. Cancer 89:817-825
2. Robertson JF, Nicholson RI, Bundred NJ, Anderson E, Rayter Z, Dowsett M, Fox JN, Gee JM, Webster A, Wakeling AE, Morris C, Dixon M (2001) Comparison of the short-term biological effects of 7alpha-[9-(4,4,5,5,5- pentafluoropentylsulfinyl)-nonyl]estra-1,3,5, (10)-triene-3,17beta-diol (Faslodex) versus tamoxifen in postmenopausal women with primary breast cancer. Cancer Res 61:6739-6746
3. DeFriend DJ, Howell A, Nicholson RI, Anderson E, Dowsett M, Mansel RE, Blamey RW, Bundred NJ, Robertson JF, Saunders C, Baum H, Walton P, Sutcliffe FA, Wakeling AE (1994) Investigation of a new pure antiestrogen (ICI 182780) in women with primary breast cancer. Cancer Res 54:408-414
4. Kuter I, Hegg R, Singer CF, Badwe R, Lowe E, on behalf of the NEWEST investigators (2008) Fulvestrant 500 versus 250 mg: first results from NEWEST, a randomized, phase II neoadjuvant trial in postmenopausal women with locally advanced, estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 109:589
5. Di Leo A, Jerusalem G, Petruzelka L, Torres R, Bondarenko IN, Khasanov R, Verhoeven D, Pedrini JL, Smirnova I, Lichinitser MR, Pendergrass K, Garnett S, Lindemann JP, Sapunar F, Martin M (2010) Results of the CONFIRM phase III trial comparing fulvestrant 250 mg with fulvestrant 500 mg in postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor-positive advanced breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 28:4594-4600
6. AstraZeneca (2010) Faslodex prescribing information. http://www1. astrazeneca-us.com/pi/faslodex.pdf. Accessed 25 Jan 2013
7. European Medicines Agency (2009) Faslodex: EPAR summary for the public. http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en-GB/document-library/EPAR-Summary-for-the- public/human/000540/WC500021169.pdf. Accessed 23 July 2011
8. Verma S, McLeod D, Batist G, Robidoux A, Martins IR, Mackey JR (2011) In the end what matters most? a review of clinical endpoints in advanced breast cancer. Oncologist 16:25-35
9. Driscoll JJ, Rixe O (2009) Overall survival: still the gold standard: why overall survival remains the definitive end point in cancer clinical trials. Cancer J 15:401-405
10. Zhuang SH, Xiu L, Elsayed YA (2009) Overall survival: a gold standard in search of a surrogate: the value of progression-free survival and time to progression as end points of drug efficacy. Cancer J 15:395-400
11. Hurvitz SA (2011) Evolving options for the treatment of metastatic breast cancer: progression-free survival as an endpoint. Cancer Treat Rev 37(7):495-504
12. Food and Drug Administration (2003) Oncologic drugs advisory committee meeting proceedings. 12-13 March 2003. http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/ cder03.html#OncologicDrugs. Accessed 12 Sept 2011
13. European Medicines Agency (Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use) (2005) Guideline on the evaluation of anticancer medicinal products in man. http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en-GB/document-library/Scientific-guideline/2009/ 12/WC500017748.pdf. Accessed 12 Sept 2011
14. European Medicines Agency (Committee for proprietary medicinal products) (2003) Points to consider on adjustment for baseline covariates. http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en-GB/document-library/Scientific-guideline/2009/ 09/WC500003639.pdf. Accessed 12 Sept 2011
15. Therasse P, Arbuck SG, Eisenhauer EA, Wanders J, Kaplan RS, Rubinstein L, Verweij J, Van Glabbeke M, van Oosterom AT, Christian MC, Gwyther SG (2000) New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, National Cancer Institute of the United States, National Cancer Institute of Canada. J Natl Cancer Inst 92:205-216
16. Ellis S, Carroll KJ, Pemberton K (2008) Analysis of duration of response in oncology trials. Contemp Clin Trials 29:456-465
17. Begg CB, Larson M (1982) A study of the use of the probability-of-being- in-response function as a summary of tumor response data. Biometrics 38:59-66
18. Temkin NR (1978) An analysis for transient states with application to tumor shrinkage. Biometrics 34:571-580