Outcomes and endpoints in cancer trials: Bridging the divide

The Lancet Oncology

Volumn 16, Issue 1, 2015, Pages e43-e52

  Wilson, Michelle K ^a   Collyar, Deborah ^b   Chingos, Diana T ^c   Friedlander, Michael ^d   Ho, Tony W ^e   Karakasis, Katherine ^a   Kaye, Stan ^f   Parmar, Mahesh K B ^g   Sydes, Matthew R ^g   Tannock, Ian F ^a   Oza, Amit M ^a  

^a PRINCESS MARGARET HOSPITAL   (Canada)

^b Patient Advocates in Research   (United States)

^c The Noreen Fraser Foundation   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES   (Australia)

^e ASTRAZENECA   (United Kingdom)

^f INSTITUTE OF CANCER RESEARCH   (United Kingdom)

^g UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CANCER INHIBITION; CANCER PATIENT; CANCER RESEARCH; CANCER SURVIVAL; CLINICAL PRACTICE; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DECISION MAKING; GENERAL PRACTITIONER; HEALTH SERVICE; HUMAN; NEOPLASM; ONCOLOGY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PHASE 1 CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); PHASE 2 CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); PHASE 3 CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); REVIEW; STUDY DESIGN; TREATMENT OUTCOME; TREATMENT RESPONSE; TUMOR VOLUME; BIOASSAY; CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); DISEASE COURSE; DISEASE FREE SURVIVAL; METHODOLOGY; MORTALITY; NEOPLASMS; PATHOLOGY; PROCEDURES; TIME;

CLINICAL TRIALS AS TOPIC; DISEASE PROGRESSION; DISEASE-FREE SURVIVAL; ENDPOINT DETERMINATION; HUMANS; NEOPLASMS; QUALITY OF LIFE; RESEARCH DESIGN; TIME FACTORS; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 84924914921     PISSN: 14702045     EISSN: 14745488     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(14)70380-8     Document Type: Review

References (100)

1. Booth CM, Tannock I Reflections on medical oncology: 25 years of clinical trials-where have we come and where are we going?. J Clin Oncol 2008, 26:6-8.
2. Wilson MK, Karakasis K, Oza AM Outcomes and endpoints in trials of cancer therapy: the past, present, and future. Lancet Oncol 2014, 16:e32-e42.
3. Martell RE, Sermer D, Getz K, Kaitin KI Oncology drug development and approval of systemic anticancer therapy by the US Food and Drug Administration. Oncologist 2013, 18:104-111.
4. McKee AE, Farrell AT, Pazdur R, Woodcock J The role of the US Food and Drug Administration review process: clinical trial endpoints in oncology. Oncologist 2010, 15(suppl):13-18.
5. Answers from the CHMP Scientific Advisory Group (SAG) for Oncology for Revision of the anticancer guideline CHMP Scientific Advisory Group (SAG) for Oncology, (accessed Dec 17, 2013). http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Other/2013/01/WC500137129.pdf.
6. Tsimberidou AM, Braiteh F, Stewart DJ, Kurzrock R Ultimate fate of oncology drugs approved by the us food and drug administration without a randomized trial. J Clin Oncol 2009, 27:6243-6250.
7. Johnson JR, Williams G, Pazdur R End points and United States Food and Drug Administration approval of oncology drugs. J Clin Oncol 2003, 21:1404-1411.
8. Junttila MR, de Sauvage FJ Influence of tumour micro-environment heterogeneity on therapeutic response. Nature 2013, 501:346-354.
9. Pazdur R Endpoints for assessing drug activity in clinical trials. Oncologist 2008, 13(suppl):19-21.
10. Smith TJ, Hillner BE Explaining marginal benefits to patients, when "marginal" means additional but not necessarily small. Clin Cancer Res 2010, 16:5981-5986.
11. Seruga B, Sterling L, Wang L, Tannock IF Reporting of serious adverse drug reactions of targeted anticancer agents in pivotal phase III clinical trials. J Clin Oncol 2011, 29:174-185.
12. Niraula S, Seruga B, Ocana A, et al. The price we pay for progress: a meta-analysis of harms of newly approved anticancer drugs. J Clin Oncol 2012, 30:3012-3019.
13. Coleman R, Alvarez R, Herzog T Endpoints in clinical trials: what do our patients consider important? A survey of the Ovarian Cancer National Alliance (OCNA). Gynecol Oncol 2013, 130:e13.
14. Havrilesky LJ, Alvarez Secord A, Ehrisman JA, et al. Relative influence of factors determining a woman's preference for treatment options in ovarian cancer. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 2014, 32(suppl). abstr 5544.
15. Henderson GE, Juengst ET, King NM, Kuczynski K, Michie M What research ethics should learn from genomics and society research: lessons from the ELSI Congress of 2011. J Law Med Ethics 2012, 40:1008-1024.
16. Joly F, Vardy J, Pintilie M, Tannock IF Quality of life and/or symptom control in randomized clinical trials for patients with advanced cancer. Annal Oncol 2007, 18:1935-1942.
17. du Bois A, Quinn M, Thigpen T, et al. 2004 consensus statements on the management of ovarian cancer: final document of the 3rd International Gynecologic Cancer Intergroup Ovarian Cancer Consensus Conference (GCIG OCCC 2004). Ann Oncol 2005, 16(suppl):viii7-viii12.
18. King JA, Wisniewski AB, Bankowski BJ, Carson KA, Zacur HA, Migeon CJ Long-term corticosteroid replacement and bone mineral density in adult women with classical congenital adrenal hyperplasia. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2006, 91:865-869.
19. Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J, et al. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer 2009, 45:228-247.
20. Therasse P, Arbuck SG, Eisenhauer EA, et al. New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000, 92:205-216.
21. Brundage M, Bass B, Davidson J, et al. Patterns of reporting health-related quality of life outcomes in randomized clinical trials: implications for clinicians and quality of life researchers. Qual Life Res 2011, 20:653-664.
22. Brim RL, Pearson SD The use and reporting of patient-reported outcomes in phase III breast cancer trials. Clin Trials 2013, 10:243-249.
23. Calvert M, Blazeby J, Revicki D, Moher D, Brundage M Reporting quality of life in clinical trials: a CONSORT extension. Lancet 2011, 378:1684-1685.
24. Friedlander ML, King MT Patient-reported outcomes in ovarian cancer clinical trials. Annals Oncol 2013, 24(suppl):x64-x68.
25. Calvert M, Blazeby J, Altman DG, et al. Reporting of patient-reported outcomes in randomized trials: the CONSORT PRO extension. JAMA 2013, 309:814-822.
26. Mols F, Beijers T, Lemmens V, van den Hurk CJ, Vreugdenhil G, van de Poll-Franse LV Chemotherapy-induced neuropathy and its association with quality of life among 2-to 11-year colorectal cancer survivors: results from the population-based PROFILES registry. J Clin Oncol 2013, 31:2699-2707.
27. Bennett BK, Park SB, Lin CS, Friedlander ML, Kiernan MC, Goldstein D Impact of oxaliplatin-induced neuropathy: a patient perspective. Support Care Cancer 2012, 20:2959-2967.
28. 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron-emission tomography on molecular targeted therapy and cytotoxic chemotherapy for clinical outcome prediction. Clin Lung Cancer 2014, 15:182-187.
29. 18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography response evaluation in patients with high-tumor burden follicular lymphoma treated with immunochemotherapy: a prospective study from the Groupe d'Etudes des Lymphomes de l'Adulte and GOELAMS. J Clin Oncol 2012, 30:4317-4322.
30. Kidd EA, Siegel BA, Dehdashti F, et al. Lymph node staging by positron emission tomography in cervical cancer: relationship to prognosis. J Clin Oncol 2010, 28:2108-2113.
31. Choi H, Charnsangavej C, Faria SC, et al. Correlation of computed tomography and positron emission tomography in patients with metastatic gastrointestinal stromal tumor treated at a single institution with imatinib mesylate: proposal of new computed tomography response criteria. J Clin Oncol 2007, 25:1753-1759.
32. Cheson BD, Pfistner B, Juweid ME, et al. Revised response criteria for malignant lymphoma. J Clin Oncol 2007, 25:579-586.
33. Bradbury P, Seymour L Tumor shrinkage and objective response rates: gold standard for oncology efficacy screening trials, or an outdated end point?. Cancer J 2009, 15:354-360.
34. 18fluoro-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography is a reliable predictor for viable tumor in postchemotherapy seminoma: an update of the prospective multicentric SEMPET trial. J Clin Oncol 2004, 22:1034-1039.
35. 18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography correlates with Akt pathway activity but is not predictive of clinical outcome during mTOR inhibitor therapy. J Clin Oncol 2009, 27:2697-2704.
36. Dowlati A, Haaga J, Remick SC, et al. Sequential tumor biopsies in early phase clinical trials of anticancer agents for pharmacodynamic evaluation. Clin Cancer Res 2001, 7:2971-2976.
37. Kalinsky K, Hershman DL Cracking open window of opportunity trials. J Clin Oncol 2012, 30:2573-2575.
38. Bonanni B, Puntoni M, Cazzaniga M, et al. Dual effect of metformin on breast cancer proliferation in a randomized presurgical trial. J Clin Oncol 2012, 30:2593-2600.
39. Glimelius B, Lahn M Window-of-opportunity trials to evaluate clinical activity of new molecular entities in oncology. Ann Oncol 2011, 22:1717-1725.
40. Graves LM, Duncan JS, Whittle MC, Johnson GL The dynamic nature of the kinome. Biochem J 2013, 450:1-8.
41. Duncan JS, Whittle MC, Nakamura K, et al. Dynamic reprogramming of the kinome in response to targeted MEK inhibition in triple-negative breast cancer. Cell 2012, 149:307-321.
42. Prentice RL Surrogate endpoints in clinical trials: definition and operational criteria. Stat Med 1989, 8:431-440.
43. Hafkenschiel JH Government regulations and the use of drugs. Calif Med 1967, 107:159-163.
44. James ND, Sydes MR, Clarke NW, et al. STAMPEDE: systemic therapy for advancing or metastatic prostate cancer-a multi-arm multi-stage randomised controlled trial. Clin Oncol 2008, 20:577-581.
45. Kaplan R, Maughan T, Crook A, et al. Evaluating many treatments and biomarkers in oncology: a new design. J Clin Oncol 2013, 31:4562-4568.
46. Parmar MK, Barthel FM, Sydes M, et al. Speeding up the evaluation of new agents in cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2008, 100:1204-1214.
47. Sydes MR, Parmar MK, Mason MD, et al. Flexible trial design in practice - stopping arms for lack-of-benefit and adding research arms mid-trial in STAMPEDE: a multi-arm multi-stage randomized controlled trial. Trials 2012, 13:168.
48. Attard G, Sydes MR, Mason MD, et al. Combining enzalutamide with abiraterone, prednisone, and androgen deprivation therapy in the STAMPEDE trial. Eur Urol 2014, published online June 27. 10.1016/j.eururo.2014.05.038.
49. Barker AD, Sigman CC, Kelloff GJ, Hylton NM, Berry DA, Esserman LJ I-SPY 2: an adaptive breast cancer trial design in the setting of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Clin Pharmacol Ther 2009, 86:97-100.
50. Stewart DJ, Kurzrock R Fool's gold, lost treasures, and the randomized clinical trial. BMC Cancer 2013, 13:193.
51. Stewart DJ, Whitney SN, Kurzrock R Equipoise lost: ethics, costs, and the regulation of cancer clinical research. J Clin Oncol 2010, 28:2925-2935.
52. Willyard C 'Basket studies' will hold intricate data for cancer drug approvals. Nat Med 2013, 19:655.
53. Iyer G, Hanrahan AJ, Milowsky MI, et al. Genome sequencing identifies a basis for everolimus sensitivity. Science 2012, 338:221.
54. Bedard P, Oza A, Tsao MS, et al. Princess Margaret Cancer Centre (PMCC) integrated molecular profiling in advanced cancers trial (IMPACT) using genotyping and targeted next-generation sequencing (NGS). Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 2013, 31(suppl). abstr 11002.
55. Tsimberidou AM, Iskander NG, Hong DS, et al. Personalized medicine in a phase I clinical trials program: the MD Anderson Cancer Center initiative. Clin Cancer Res 2012, 18:6373-6383.
56. Vogelstein B, Papadopoulos N, Velculescu VE, Zhou S, Diaz LA, Kinzler KW Cancer genome landscapes. Science 2013, 339:1546-1558.
57. Bedard PL, Hansen AR, Ratain MJ, Siu LL Tumour heterogeneity in the clinic. Nature 2013, 501:355-364.
58. Yang H, Higgins B, Kolinsky K, et al. Antitumor activity of BRAF inhibitor vemurafenib in preclinical models of BRAF-mutant colorectal cancer. Cancer Res 2012, 72:779-789.
59. Prahallad A, Sun C, Huang S, et al. Unresponsiveness of colon cancer to BRAF(V600E) inhibition through feedback activation of EGFR. Nature 2012, 483:100-103.
60. Chapman PB, Hauschild A, Robert C, et al. Improved survival with vemurafenib in melanoma with BRAF V600E mutation. N Engl J Med 2011, 364:2507-2516.
61. Vogel CL, Cobleigh MA, Tripathy D, et al. Efficacy and safety of trastuzumab as a single agent in first-line treatment of HER2-overexpressing metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2002, 20:719-726.
62. Flaherty KT, Puzanov I, Kim KB, et al. Inhibition of mutated, activated BRAF in metastatic melanoma. N Engl J Med 2010, 363:809-819.
63. Crinò LK, Kim D, Riely GJ, et al. Initial phase II results with crizotinib in advanced ALK-positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): PROFILE 1005. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 2011, 29(suppl). abstr 7514.
64. Berthold DR, Gulamhusein A, Jackson JI, Tannock IF The transition from phase II to phase III studies. J Clin Oncol 2009, 27:1150-1151.
65. Bookman MA, Greer BE, Ozols RF Optimal therapy of advanced ovarian cancer: carboplatin and paclitaxel versus cisplatin and paclitaxel (GOG158) and an update on GOG0182-ICON5. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2003, 13(suppl):149-155.
66. Seymour MT, Maughan TS, Ledermann JA, et al. Different strategies of sequential and combination chemotherapy for patients with poor prognosis advanced colorectal cancer (MRC FOCUS): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2007, 370:143-152.
67. Parker CC, Sydes MR, Mason MD, et al. Prostate radiotherapy for men with metastatic disease: a new comparison in the systemic therapy in advancing or metastatic prostate cancer: evaluation of drug efficacy (STAMPEDE) trial. BJU Int 2013, 111:697-699.
68. Stensland KD, McBride R, Wisnivesky JP, et al. Premature termination of genitourinary cancer clinical trials. 2014 Genitourinary Cancers Symposium; San Francisco, CA, USA; Jan 30-Feb 1, 2014: abstr 288.
69. Mani N, Murray J, Gulick RM, et al. Novel clinical trial designs for the development of new antiretroviral agents. Aids 2012, 26:899-907.
70. Cohen MH, Williams GA, Sridhara R, et al. United States Food and Drug administration drug approval summary: gefitinib (ZD1839; Iressa) tablets. Clin Cancer Res 2004, 10:1212-1218.
71. Kris MG, Natale RB, Herbst RS, et al. Efficacy of gefitinib, an inhibitor of the epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase, in symptomatic patients with non-small cell lung cancer: a randomized trial. JAMA 2003, 290:2149-2158.
72. Thatcher N, Chang A, Parikh P, et al. Gefitinib plus best supportive care in previously treated patients with refractory advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: results from a randomised, placebo-controlled, multicentre study (Iressa Survival Evaluation in Lung Cancer). Lancet 2005, 366:1527-1537.
73. Hirsch FR, Varella-Garcia M, Bunn PA, et al. Molecular predictors of outcome with gefitinib in a phase III placebo-controlled study in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol 2006, 24:5034-5042.
74. Omura GA, Morrow CP, Blessing JA, et al. A randomized comparison of melphalan versus melphalan plus hexamethylmelamine versus adriamycin plus cyclophosphamide in ovarian carcinoma. Cancer 1983, 51:783-789.
75. Omura G, Blessing JA, Ehrlich CE, et al. A randomized trial of cyclophosphamide and doxorubicin with or without cisplatin in advanced ovarian carcinoma. A gynecologic oncology group study. Cancer 1986, 57:1725-1730.
76. Burger RA, Brady MF, Bookman MA, et al. Incorporation of bevacizumab in the primary treatment of ovarian cancer. N Engl J Med 2011, 365:2473-2483.
77. Perren TJ, Swart AM, Pfisterer J, et al. A phase 3 trial of bevacizumab in ovarian cancer. N Engl J Med 2011, 365:2484-2496.
78. Broglio KR, Berry DA Detecting an overall survival benefit that is derived from progression-free survival. J Natl Cancer Inst 2009, 101:1642-1649.
79. Foukakis T, Fornander T, Lekberg T, Hellborg H, Adolfsson J, Bergh J Age-specific trends of survival in metastatic breast cancer: 26 years longitudinal data from a population-based cancer registry in Stockholm, Sweden. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2011, 130:553-560.
80. Tevaarwerk AJ, Gray RJ, Schneider BP, et al. Survival in patients with metastatic recurrent breast cancer after adjuvant chemotherapy: little evidence of improvement over the past 30 years. Cancer 2013, 119:1140-1148.
81. Slamon DJ, Leyland-Jones B, Shak S, et al. Use of chemotherapy plus a monoclonal antibody against HER2 for metastatic breast cancer that overexpresses HER2. N Engl J Med 2001, 344:783-792.
82. Miles DW, Dieras V, Cortes J, Duenne AA, Yi J, O'Shaughnessy J First-line bevacizumab in combination with chemotherapy for HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer: pooled and subgroup analyses of data from 2447 patients. Ann Oncol 2013, 24:2773-2780.
83. D'Agostino RB Changing end points in breast-cancer drug approval-the Avastin story. N Engl J Med 2011, 365:e2.
84. Johnson JR, Ning YM, Farrell A, Justice R, Keegan P, Pazdur R Accelerated approval of oncology products: the food and drug administration experience. J Natl Cancer Inst 2011, 103:636-644.
85. Baldwin J FDA evaluating oxaliplatin for advanced colorectal cancer treatment. J Natl Cancer Inst 2002, 94:1191-1193.
86. Rothenberg ML, Oza AM, Bigelow RH, et al. Superiority of oxaliplatin and fluorouracil-leucovorin compared with either therapy alone in patients with progressive colorectal cancer after irinotecan and fluorouracil-leucovorin: interim results of a phase III trial. J Clin Oncol 2003, 21:2059-2069.
87. Goldberg RM, Sargent DJ, Morton RF, et al. A randomized controlled trial of fluorouracil plus leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin combinations in patients with previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol 2004, 22:23-30.
88. Aghajanian C, Blank SV, Goff BA, et al. OCEANS: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III trial of chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab in patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent epithelial ovarian, primary peritoneal, or fallopian tube cancer. J Clin Oncol 2012, 30:2039-2045.
89. Novel new drugs 2013 summary US Food and Drug Administration, (accessed Jan 31, 2014). http://www.fda.gov/downloads/drugs/developmentapprovalprocess/druginnovation/ucm381803.pdf.
90. Tannock IF, Osoba D, Stockler MR, et al. Chemotherapy with mitoxantrone plus prednisone or prednisone alone for symptomatic hormone-resistant prostate cancer: a Canadian randomized trial with palliative end points. J Clin Oncol 1996, 14:1756-1764.
91. Mesa RA, Gotlib J, Gupta V, et al. Effect of ruxolitinib therapy on myelofibrosis-related symptoms and other patient-reported outcomes in COMFORT-I: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. J Clin Oncol 2013, 31:1285-1292.
92. Verstovsek S, Mesa RA, Gotlib J, et al. A double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of ruxolitinib for myelofibrosis. N Engl J Med 2012, 366:799-807.
93. Booth CM, Tannock IF Randomised controlled trials and population-based observational research: partners in the evolution of medical evidence. Br J Cancer 2014, 110:551-555.
94. Booth CM, Tannock IF Evaluation of treatment benefit: randomized controlled trials and population-based observational research. J Clin Oncol 2013, 31:3298-3299.
95. Unger JM, Barlow WE, Martin DP, et al. Comparison of survival outcomes among cancer patients treated in and out of clinical trials. J Natl Cancer Inst 2014, 106:dju002.
96. Elting LS, Cooksley C, Bekele BN, et al. Generalizability of cancer clinical trial results: prognostic differences between participants and nonparticipants. Cancer 2006, 106:2452-2458.
97. Peppercorn JM, Weeks JC, Cook EF, Joffe S Comparison of outcomes in cancer patients treated within and outside clinical trials: conceptual framework and structured review. Lancet 2004, 363:263-270.
98. Vist GE, Hagen KB, Devereaux PJ, Bryant D, Kristoffersen DT, Oxman AD Systematic review to determine whether participation in a trial influences outcome. BMJ 2005, 330:1175.
99. Hudson TJ, Anderson W, et al. International network of cancer genome projects. Nature 2010, 464:993-998. International Cancer Genome Consortium.
100. Integrated genomic analyses of ovarian carcinoma. Nature 2011, 474:609-615. Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network.