Literature DB >> 1425885

Surrogate endpoints: a basis for a rational approach.

J P Boissel1, J P Collet, P Moleur, M Haugh.   

Abstract

In clinical trials, the clinical endpoint is often replaced by an intermediate endpoint, known in some instances as a "surrogate" endpoint. The reasons for the substitution are often both practical and financial. At present, no theoretical basis or practical guidelines exist to help in the choice of surrogate endpoints. An approach is proposed here, based on three provisos which can be verified using one of a series of equations, if sufficient data on the pathophysiology and epidemiology of the disease are available. It is shown that even a strong statistical correlation is not a sufficient criterion for the definition of a surrogate endpoint. It is apparent that results obtained with the commonly used "surrogate" endpoints should be cautiously considered, and that the assessment of treatments should, when possible, be based on clinical rather than intermediate endpoints.

Mesh:

Year:  1992        PMID: 1425885     DOI: 10.1007/bf02333016

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol        ISSN: 0031-6970            Impact factor:   2.953


  13 in total

1.  [Intermediary and substitution criteria in the development of anti-arrhythmia agents].

Authors:  M Lièvre; A Leizorovicz; J P Boissel
Journal:  Arch Mal Coeur Vaiss       Date:  1991-02

2.  The cardiac arrhythmia suppression trial (CAST).

Authors:  J N Ruskin
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1989-08-10       Impact factor: 91.245

3.  Surrogate endpoints in clinical trials: ophthalmologic disorders.

Authors:  A Hillis; D Seigel
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1989-04       Impact factor: 2.373

4.  Surrogate endpoints in clinical trials: cardiovascular diseases.

Authors:  J Wittes; E Lakatos; J Probstfield
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1989-04       Impact factor: 2.373

5.  Surrogate endpoints in clinical trials: definition and operational criteria.

Authors:  R L Prentice
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1989-04       Impact factor: 2.373

6.  Systolic versus diastolic blood pressure and risk of coronary heart disease. The Framingham study.

Authors:  W B Kannel; T Gordon; M J Schwartz
Journal:  Am J Cardiol       Date:  1971-04       Impact factor: 2.778

7.  Relationship of blood pressure, serum cholesterol, smoking habit, relative weight and ECG abnormalities to incidence of major coronary events: final report of the pooling project. The pooling project research group.

Authors: 
Journal:  J Chronic Dis       Date:  1978-04

8.  Preliminary report: effect of encainide and flecainide on mortality in a randomized trial of arrhythmia suppression after myocardial infarction.

Authors: 
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1989-08-10       Impact factor: 91.245

9.  Surrogate endpoints in clinical trials: cancer.

Authors:  S Ellenberg; J M Hamilton
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1989-04       Impact factor: 2.373

10.  Blood pressure, stroke, and coronary heart disease. Part 1, Prolonged differences in blood pressure: prospective observational studies corrected for the regression dilution bias.

Authors:  S MacMahon; R Peto; J Cutler; R Collins; P Sorlie; J Neaton; R Abbott; J Godwin; A Dyer; J Stamler
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1990-03-31       Impact factor: 79.321

View more
  32 in total

Review 1.  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).

Authors:  Marissa N Lassere; Kent R Johnson; Michal Schiff; David Rees
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2012-03-12       Impact factor: 4.615

Review 2.  The true treatment benefit is unpredictable in clinical trials using surrogate outcome measured with diagnostic tests.

Authors:  Behrouz Kassaï; Nirav R Shah; Alain Leizorovicza; Michel Cucherat; Francois Gueyffier; Jean-Pierre Boissel
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 6.437

Review 3.  Markers for nutrition studies: review of criteria for the evaluation of markers.

Authors:  Jan de Vries; Jean-Michel Antoine; Tomasz Burzykowski; Alessandro Chiodini; Mike Gibney; Gunter Kuhnle; Agnès Méheust; Loek Pijls; Ian Rowland
Journal:  Eur J Nutr       Date:  2013-08-17       Impact factor: 5.614

Review 4.  Clinical trial design in the neurocritical care unit.

Authors:  C E Hall; M Mirski; Y Y Palesch; M N Diringer; A I Qureshi; C S Robertson; R Geocadin; C A C Wijman; P D Le Roux; Jose I Suarez
Journal:  Neurocrit Care       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 3.210

5.  A mathematical model for the determination of the optimum value of the treatment threshold for a continuous risk factor.

Authors:  M Cucherat; J P Boissel
Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol       Date:  1998-01       Impact factor: 8.082

6.  Users' guide to the surgical literature: how to assess an article using surrogate end points.

Authors:  Lucas Gallo; Cagla Eskicioglu; Luis H Braga; Forough Farrokhyar; Achilleas Thoma
Journal:  Can J Surg       Date:  2017-08       Impact factor: 2.089

Review 7.  Surrogate endpoints in liver surgery related trials: a systematic review of the literature.

Authors:  Liliane Mpabanzi; Kim M C van Mierlo; Massimo Malagó; Cornelis H C Dejong; Dimitrios Lytras; Steven W M Olde Damink
Journal:  HPB (Oxford)       Date:  2012-10-22       Impact factor: 3.647

Review 8.  Using pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic relationships to predict the effect of poor compliance.

Authors:  Jean-Pierre Boissel; Patrice Nony
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 6.447

9.  Cost-effectiveness of a multifactorial fracture prevention program for elderly people admitted to nursing homes.

Authors:  Dirk Müller; Lisa Borsi; Claudia Stracke; Stephanie Stock; Björn Stollenwerk
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2014-05-13

Review 10.  Biomarkers of recovery after stroke.

Authors:  Marie-Hélène Milot; Steven C Cramer
Journal:  Curr Opin Neurol       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 5.710

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.