Literature DB >> 18187370

Analysis of duration of response in oncology trials.

Stuart Ellis1, Kevin J Carroll, Kristine Pemberton.   

Abstract

The fraction of patients who respond to treatment and the duration of response in the subset of responding patients are commonly evaluated in oncology trials of cytotoxic compounds. While formal, comparative analysis of the fraction of patients responding to treatment is straightforward in a randomised trial, analyses that attempt to compare treatments in terms of the duration of response in responding patients are likely to be biased since the groups being compared are defined by the post-treatment outcome of response rather than by randomisation. Subsets of responding patients may not be comparable with respect to baseline prognostic factors and, consequently, formal comparative analysis is discouraged by the European Medicines Evaluation Agency. In an attempt to combine both the fraction of patients responding to treatment and the duration of response in responding patients, Temkin considered the probability of being in response function (PBRF) as a description of the treatment difference. Begg and Larson subsequently developed a parametric version of the PBRF under the exponential assumption. This paper briefly considers the PBRF as a means of estimating the expected duration of response across all randomised patients, thereby allowing a formal and unbiased comparison of treatments for duration of response. Building on earlier work, a more general and flexible approach to estimating the expected duration of response is offered to generalize beyond the exponential distribution.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 18187370     DOI: 10.1016/j.cct.2007.10.008

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials        ISSN: 1551-7144            Impact factor:   2.226


  8 in total

1.  Phase 1b study of otlertuzumab (TRU-016), an anti-CD37 monospecific ADAPTIR™ therapeutic protein, in combination with rituximab and bendamustine in relapsed indolent lymphoma patients.

Authors:  Ajay K Gopal; Stefano R Tarantolo; Naresh Bellam; Damian J Green; Melissa Griffin; Tatyana Feldman; Anthony R Mato; Amy J Eisenfeld; Scott C Stromatt; Andre Goy
Journal:  Invest New Drugs       Date:  2014-06-15       Impact factor: 3.850

2.  Evaluating Treatment Effect Based on Duration of Response for a Comparative Oncology Study.

Authors:  Bo Huang; Lu Tian; Enayet Talukder; Mace Rothenberg; Dae Hyun Kim; Lee-Jen Wei
Journal:  JAMA Oncol       Date:  2018-06-01       Impact factor: 31.777

3.  Analysis of Response Data for Assessing Treatment Effects in Comparative Clinical Studies.

Authors:  Bo Huang; Lu Tian; Zachary R McCaw; Xiaodong Luo; Enayet Talukder; Mace Rothenberg; Wanling Xie; Toni K Choueiri; Dae Hyun Kim; Lee-Jen Wei
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2020-07-07       Impact factor: 25.391

4.  Nonparametric tests for multistate processes with clustered data.

Authors:  Giorgos Bakoyannis; Dipankar Bandyopadhyay
Journal:  Ann Inst Stat Math       Date:  2022-01-22       Impact factor: 1.180

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

Authors:  Sally Anne Garnett; Miguel Martin; Guy Jerusalem; Lubos Petruzelka; Roberto Torres; Igor N Bondarenko; Rustem Khasanov; Didier Verhoeven; José L Pedrini; Iva Smirnova; Mikhail R Lichinitser; Kelly Pendergrass; Justin P O Lindemann; Angelo Di Leo
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2013-02-03       Impact factor: 4.872

6.  Assessing treatment efficacy in the subset of responders in a randomized clinical trial.

Authors:  E L Korn; M Othus; T Chen; B Freidlin
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  2017-07-01       Impact factor: 32.976

7.  Randomized phase 2 study of otlertuzumab and bendamustine versus bendamustine in patients with relapsed chronic lymphocytic leukaemia.

Authors:  Tadeusz Robak; Andrzej Hellmann; Janusz Kloczko; Javier Loscertales; Ewa Lech-Maranda; John M Pagel; Anthony Mato; John C Byrd; Farrukh T Awan; Holger Hebart; Jose A Garcia-Marco; Brian T Hill; Michael Hallek; Amy J Eisenfeld; Scott C Stromatt; Ulrich Jaeger
Journal:  Br J Haematol       Date:  2016-12-15       Impact factor: 6.998

8.  [Clinical Experience with First-generation Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 
Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors in Non-small Cell Lung Cancer Patients 
with Brain Metastasis].

Authors:  Huixing Dong; Shaohua Cui; Feng Pan; Lili Dong; Yanjie Niu; Yizhuo Zhao; Aiqin Gu; Xiaoyan Jin; Liyan Jiang
Journal:  Zhongguo Fei Ai Za Zhi       Date:  2017-02-20
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.