Meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials show suboptimal validity of surrogate outcomes for overall survival in advanced colorectal cancer

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

Volumn 68, Issue 7, 2015, Pages 833-842

  Ciani, Oriana ^a,b   Buyse, Marc ^c,d   Garside, Ruth ^a   Peters, Jaime ^a   Saad, Everardo D ^e   Stein, Ken ^a   Taylor, Rod S ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF EXETER MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United Kingdom)

^b BOCCONI UNIVERSITY   (Italy)

^c HASSELT UNIVERSITY   (Belgium)

^d International Drug Development Institute (IDDI)   (United States)

^e Dendrix Research   (Brazil)

Author keywords

Colorectal cancer; Health technology assessment; PFS; Surrogate outcome; TTP; Tumor response

Indexed keywords

ADVANCED CANCER; CANCER CHEMOTHERAPY; COLORECTAL CANCER; COMPARATIVE STUDY; HAZARD RATIO; HUMAN; META ANALYSIS; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; OVERALL SURVIVAL; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGRESSION FREE SURVIVAL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); REVIEW; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; TIME TO PROGRESSION; TUMOR RESPONSE RATE; VALIDITY; CHEMISTRY; COLORECTAL NEOPLASMS; DISEASE COURSE; DISEASE FREE SURVIVAL; MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY; MORTALITY; PROCEDURES; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA; SURVIVAL RATE; TREATMENT OUTCOME; VALIDATION STUDY;

TUMOR MARKER;

BIOMEDICAL TECHNOLOGY; COLORECTAL NEOPLASMS; DISEASE PROGRESSION; DISEASE-FREE SURVIVAL; HUMANS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; SURVIVAL RATE; TREATMENT OUTCOME; TUMOR MARKERS, BIOLOGICAL;

EID: 84930574659     PISSN: 08954356     EISSN: 18785921     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.02.016     Document Type: Review

References (53)

1. V.G. De Gruttola, P. Clax, D.L. DeMets, G.J. Downing, S.S. Ellenberg, and L. Friedman Considerations in the evaluation of surrogate endpoints in clinical trials. summary of a National Institutes of Health workshop Control Clin Trials 22 2001 485 502
2. R. Lozano, M. Naghavi, K. Foreman, S. Lim, K. Shibuya, and V. Aboyans Global and regional mortality from 235 causes of death for 20 age groups in 1990 and 2010: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010 Lancet 380 2012 2095 2128
3. R. Sridhara, J.R. Johnson, R. Justice, P. Keegan, A. Chakravarty, and R. Pazdur Review of oncology and hematology drug product approvals at the US Food and Drug Administration between July 2005 and December 2007 J Natl Cancer Inst 102 2010 230 243
4. Shi Q, Sargent DJ. Meta-analysis for the evaluation of surrogate endpoints in cancer clinical trials. 2009. [cited 14 (Shi, Sargent) Division of biomedical statistics and informatics, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN 55905, United States]; 2:[102-111].
5. A. Chakravarty Regulatory aspects in using surrogate markers in clinical trials T. Burzykowsi, G. Molenberghs, M. Buyse, The evaluation of surrogate endpoints 2005 Springer New York, NY
6. T. Burzykowski, G. Molenberghs, and M. Buyse The evaluation of surrogate endpoints M. Gail, J.M. Samet, A. Tsiatis, W. Wong, Statistics for biology and health 2005 Springer Science and Business Media, Inc US 416
7. M. Buyse, T. Burzykowski, K. Carroll, S. Michiels, D.J. Sargent, and L.L. Miller Progression-free survival is a surrogate for survival in advanced colorectal cancer J Clin Oncol 25 2007 5218 5224
8. P.A. Tang, S.M. Bentzen, E.X. Chen, and L.L. Siu Surrogate endpoints for median overall survival in metastatic colorectal cancer: literature-based analysis from 39 randomized controlled trials of first-line chemotherapy J Clin Oncol 25 2007 4562 4568
9. E. Green, G. Yothers, and D.J. Sargent Surrogate endpoint validation: statistical elegance versus clinical relevance Stat Methods Med Res 17 5 2008 477 486
10. C. Chirila, D. Odom, G. Devercelli, S. Khan, B.N. Sherif, and J.A. Kaye Meta-analysis of the association between progression-free survival and overall survival in metastatic colorectal cancer Int J Colorectal Dis 27 5 2012 623 634
11. T. Burzykowski, G. Molenberghs, M. Buyse, H. Geys, and R. Didier Validation of surrogate endpoints in multiple randomized clinical trials with failure time endpoints J R Stat Soc Ser C (Applied Statistics) 50 4 2001 405 422
12. T. Burzykowski, and M. Buyse Surrogate threshold effect: an alternative measure for meta-analytic surrogate endpoint validation Pharm Stat 5 2006 173 186
13. K.R. Johnson, C. Ringland, B.J. Stokes, D.M. Anthony, N. Freemantle, and A. Irs Response rate or time-to-progression as predictors of survival in trials of metastatic colorectal cancer or non-small-cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis Lancet Oncol 7 2006 741 746
14. M. Buyse, P. Thirion, R.W. Carlson, T. Burzykowski, G. Molenberghs, and P. Piedbois Relation between tumour response to first-line chemotherapy and survival in advanced colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis. Meta-analysis group in cancer Lancet 356 2000 373 378
15. D. Moher, A. Liberati, J. Tetzlaff, D.G. Altman PRISMA Group Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement BMJ 339 2009 b2535
16. O. Ciani, S. Davis, P. Tappenden, R. Garside, K. Stein, and A. Cantrell Validation of surrogate endpoints in advanced solid tumors: systematic review of statistical methods, results, and implications for policy makers Int J Technol Assess Health Care 30 3 2014 312 324
17. J. Higgins, and S. Green Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011] 2011 The Cochrane Collaboration, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd New Jersey
18. S. Green, J. Benedetti, and J. Crowley Clinical trials in oncology 1997 Chapman & Hall London
19. P. Therasse, S.G. Arbuck, E.A. Eisenhauer, J. Wanders, R.S. Kaplan, and L. Rubinstein 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 2000 205 216
20. World Health Organization WHO handbook for reporting results of cancer treatment in WHO Offset Publication 1979 World Health Organization Geneve
21. O. Ciani, M. Buyse, R. Garside, T. Pavey, K. Stein, and J.A. Sterne Comparison of treatment effect sizes associated with surrogate and final patient-relevant outcomes in randomised controlled trials: meta-epidemiological study BMJ 346 2013 f457
22. J.P. Higgins, and S. Green Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions Cochrane Book Series ed. C. Collaboration 2008 John Wiley & Sons Chichester West Sussex, England
23. M. Egger, G. Davey Smith, M. Schneider, and C. Minder Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test BMJ 315 1997 629 634
24. R.M. Harbord, M. Egger, and J.A. Sterne A modified test for small-study effects in meta-analyses of controlled trials with binary endpoints Stat Med 25 2006 3443 3457
25. D. Jackson, R. Riley, and I.R. White Multivariate meta-analysis: potential and promise Stat Med 30 2011 2481 2498
26. J.A. Sterne, P. Jüni, K.F. Schulz, D.G. Altman, C. Bartlett, and M. Egger Statistical methods for assessing the influence of study characteristics on treatment effects in 'meta-epidemiological' research Stat Med 21 2002 1513 1524
27. D.G. Altman, and J.M. Bland Interaction revisited: the difference between two estimates BMJ 326 2003 219
28. H.C. Bucher, G.H. Guyatt, L.E. Griffith, and S.D. Walter The results of direct and indirect treatment comparisons in meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials J Clin Epidemiol 50 1997 683 691
29. C. Louvet, A. de Gramont, C. Tournigand, P. Artru, F. Maindrault-Goebel, and M. Krulik Correlation between progression-free survival and response rate in patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma Cancer 91 2001 2033 2038
30. N.R. Foster, Y. Qi, Q. Shi, J.E. Krook, J.W. Kugler, and J.R. Jett Tumor response and progression-free survival as potential surrogate endpoints for overall survival in extensive stage small-cell lung cancer: findings on the basis of North Central Cancer Treatment Group trials Cancer 117 2011 1262 1271
31. A. Hackshaw, A. Knight, P. Barrett-Lee, and R. Leonard Surrogate markers and survival in women receiving first-line combination anthracycline chemotherapy for advanced breast cancer Br J Cancer 93 2005 1215 1221
32. T. Burzykowski, M. Buyse, M.J. Piccart-Gebhart, G. Sledge, J. Carmichael, and H.J. Lück Evaluation of tumor response, disease control, progression-free survival, and time-to-progression as potential surrogate endpoints in metastatic breast cancer J Clin Oncol 26 2008 1987 1992
33. K. Hotta, K. Kiura, Y. Fujiwara, N. Takigawa, A. Hisamoto, and E. Ichihara Role of survival post-progression in phase III trials of systemic chemotherapy in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a systematic review PLoS One 6 2011 e26646
34. Burzykowski T, Buyse M. Surrogate threshold effect: an alternative measure for meta-analytic surrogate endpoint validation. 2006. 3:[173-86]. Available at http://ovidsp.ovid.com/ovidweb.cgi?T=JS&PAGE=reference&D=med4&NEWS=N&AN=17080751. Accessed January 21, 2014.
35. M.M. Oken, R.H. Creech, D.C. Tormey, J. Horton, T.E. Davis, and E.T. McFadden Toxicity and response criteria of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Am J Clin Oncol 5 1982 649 655
36. P. Armitage, G. Berry, and J. Matthews Regression and correlation Statistical methods in medical research 4th ed 2002 Blackwell Scientific Publications Oxford 187 204
37. C.J. Weir, and R.J. Walley Statistical evaluation of biomarkers as surrogate endpoints: a literature review Stat Med 25 2006 183 203
38. M.N. Lassere The Biomarker-Surrogacy Evaluation Schema: a review of the biomarker-surrogate literature and a proposal for a criterion-based, quantitative, multidimensional hierarchical levels of evidence schema for evaluating the status of biomarkers as surrogate endpoints Stat Methods Med Res 17 3 2008 303 340
39. M. Buyse, D.J. Sargent, A. Grothey, A. Matheson, and A. de Gramont Biomarkers and surrogate endpoints - the challenge of statistical validation Nat Rev Clin Oncol 7 6 2010 309 317
40. S.D. Walter, X. Sun, D. Heels-Ansdell, and G. Guyatt Treatment effects on patient-important outcomes can be small, even with large effects on surrogate markers J Clin Epidemol 65 2012 940 945
41. E. Amir, B. Seruga, R. Kwong, I.F. Tannock, and A. Ocaña Poor correlation between progression-free and overall survival in modern clinical trials: are composite endpoints the answer? Eur J Cancer 48 2012 385 388
42. J. Felix, F. Aragão, J.M. Almeida, F.J. Calado, D. Ferreira, and A.B. Parreira Time-dependent endpoints as predictors of overall survival in multiple myeloma BMC Cancer 13 2013 122
43. M. Buyse, R.W. Carlson, and P. Piedbois Meta-analyses of published results are unreliable J Clin Oncol 17 1999 1646 1647
44. M. Buyse, G. Molenberghs, X. Paoletti, K. Oba, A. Alonso, and W. Van der Elst Validation of surrogate endpoints with examples from cancer clinical trials Biom J 2015
45. E.E. Wilhelm, E. Oster, and I. Shoulson Approaches and costs for sharing clinical research data JAMA 311 2014 1201 1202
46. S. Michiels, P. Piedbois, S. Burdett, N. Syz, L. Stewart, and J.P. Pignon Meta-analysis when only the median survival times are known: a comparison with individual-patient data results Int J Technol Assess Health Care 21 1 2005 119 125
47. J. Wilkerson, and T. Fojo Progression-free survival is simply a measure of a drug's effect while administered and is not a surrogate for overall survival Cancer J 15 2009 379 385
48. T.E. Delea, A. Khuu, D.Y. Heng, T. Haas, and D. Soulières Association between treatment effects on disease progression endpoints and overall survival in clinical studies of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma Br J Cancer 107 2012 1059 1068
49. K. Shitara, J. Ikeda, T. Yokota, D. Takahari, T. Ura, and K. Muro Progression-free survival and time-to-progression as surrogate markers of overall survival in patients with advanced gastric cancer: analysis of 36 randomized trials Invest New Drugs 30 3 2012 1224 1231
50. C.L. Vale, J.F. Tierney, and S. Burdett Can trial quality be reliably assessed from published reports of cancer trials: evaluation of risk of bias assessments in systematic reviews BMJ 346 2013 f1798
51. N.E. Kemeny Treatment of metastatic colon cancer: "the times they are A-changing" J Clin Oncol 31 2013 1913 1916
52. IQWiG Validity of surrogate endpoints in oncology. Executive summary, in IQWiG Reports 2011 IQWiG Cologne, Germany
53. M.N. Lassere, K.R. Johnson, M. Schiff, and D. Rees Is blood pressure reduction a valid surrogate endpoint for stroke prevention? an analysis incorporating a systematic review of randomised controlled trials, a by-trial weighted errors-in-variables regression, the surrogate threshold effect (STE) and the Biomarker-Surrogacy (BioSurrogate) Evaluation Schema (BSES) BMC Med Res Methodol 12 2012 27