Literature DB >> 25256896

Guidelines for time-to-event end-point definitions in trials for pancreatic cancer. Results of the DATECAN initiative (Definition for the Assessment of Time-to-event End-points in CANcer trials).

Franck Bonnetain1, Bert Bonsing2, Thierry Conroy3, Adelaide Dousseau4, Bengt Glimelius5, Karin Haustermans6, François Lacaine7, Jean Luc Van Laethem8, Thomas Aparicio9, Daniela Aust10, Claudio Bassi11, Virginie Berger12, Emmanuel Chamorey13, Benoist Chibaudel14, Laeticia Dahan15, Aimery De Gramont14, Jean Robert Delpero16, Christos Dervenis17, Michel Ducreux18, Jocelyn Gal19, Erich Gerber20, Paula Ghaneh21, Pascal Hammel22, Alain Hendlisz23, Valérie Jooste24, Roberto Labianca25, Aurelien Latouche26, Manfred Lutz27, Teresa Macarulla28, David Malka18, Muriel Mauer29, Emmanuel Mitry30, John Neoptolemos31, Patrick Pessaux32, Alain Sauvanet33, Josep Tabernero28, Julien Taieb34, Geertjan van Tienhoven35, Sophie Gourgou-Bourgade36, Carine Bellera37, Simone Mathoulin-Pélissier37, Laurence Collette29.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Using potential surrogate end-points for overall survival (OS) such as Disease-Free- (DFS) or Progression-Free Survival (PFS) is increasingly common in randomised controlled trials (RCTs). However, end-points are too often imprecisely defined which largely contributes to a lack of homogeneity across trials, hampering comparison between them. The aim of the DATECAN (Definition for the Assessment of Time-to-event End-points in CANcer trials)-Pancreas project is to provide guidelines for standardised definition of time-to-event end-points in RCTs for pancreatic cancer.
METHODS: Time-to-event end-points currently used were identified from a literature review of pancreatic RCT trials (2006-2009). Academic research groups were contacted for participation in order to select clinicians and methodologists to participate in the pilot and scoring groups (>30 experts). A consensus was built after 2 rounds of the modified Delphi formal consensus approach with the Rand scoring methodology (range: 1-9).
RESULTS: For pancreatic cancer, 14 time to event end-points and 25 distinct event types applied to two settings (detectable disease and/or no detectable disease) were considered relevant and included in the questionnaire sent to 52 selected experts. Thirty experts answered both scoring rounds. A total of 204 events distributed over the 14 end-points were scored. After the first round, consensus was reached for 25 items; after the second consensus was reached for 156 items; and after the face-to-face meeting for 203 items.
CONCLUSION: The formal consensus approach reached the elaboration of guidelines for standardised definitions of time-to-event end-points allowing cross-comparison of RCTs in pancreatic cancer.
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Clinical trials; Consensus; Guidelines; Methodology; Pancreatic cancer; Time to event end-point

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25256896     DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2014.07.011

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Cancer        ISSN: 0959-8049            Impact factor:   9.162


  17 in total

1.  CA19-9-related tumor kinetics after first-line chemotherapy of patients with advanced pancreatic cancer: a monoinstitutional experience.

Authors:  Giuseppe Colloca; Antonella Venturino; Domenico Guarneri
Journal:  Med Oncol       Date:  2016-08-13       Impact factor: 3.064

2.  Consensus statement on mandatory measurements in pancreatic cancer trials (COMM-PACT) for systemic treatment of unresectable disease.

Authors:  Emil Ter Veer; L Bengt van Rijssen; Marc G Besselink; Rosa M A Mali; Jordan D Berlin; Stefan Boeck; Franck Bonnetain; Ian Chau; Thierry Conroy; Eric Van Cutsem; Gael Deplanque; Helmut Friess; Bengt Glimelius; David Goldstein; Richard Herrmann; Roberto Labianca; Jean-Luc Van Laethem; Teresa Macarulla; Jonathan H M van der Meer; John P Neoptolemos; Takuji Okusaka; Eileen M O'Reilly; Uwe Pelzer; Philip A Philip; Marcel J van der Poel; Michele Reni; Werner Scheithauer; Jens T Siveke; Chris Verslype; Olivier R Busch; Johanna W Wilmink; Martijn G H van Oijen; Hanneke W M van Laarhoven
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2018-03       Impact factor: 41.316

3.  Prognostic value of health-related quality of life in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a random forest methodology.

Authors:  Momar Diouf; Thomas Filleron; Anne-Laure Pointet; Anne-Claire Dupont-Gossard; David Malka; Pascal Artru; Mélanie Gauthier; Thierry Lecomte; Thomas Aparicio; Anne Thirot-Bidault; Céline Lobry; Francine Fein; Olivier Dubreuil; Bruno Landi; Aziz Zaanan; Julien Taieb; Franck Bonnetain
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2015-11-28       Impact factor: 4.147

4.  Metastatic pancreatic cancer: abdominal pain in a 22-year-old woman.

Authors:  Bakul T Roy; Roshan B Roy
Journal:  BMJ Case Rep       Date:  2015-11-26

5.  Guidelines for time-to-event end-point definitions in adjuvant randomised trials for patients with localised colon cancer: Results of the DATECAN initiative.

Authors:  Romain Cohen; Dewi Vernerey; Carine Bellera; Aurélia Meurisse; Julie Henriques; Xavier Paoletti; Benoît Rousseau; Steven Alberts; Thomas Aparicio; Ioannis Boukovinas; Sharlene Gill; Richard M Goldberg; Axel Grothey; Tetsuya Hamaguchi; Timothy Iveson; Rachel Kerr; Roberto Labianca; Sara Lonardi; Jeffrey Meyerhardt; James Paul; Cornelis J A Punt; Leonard Saltz; Marck P Saunders; Hans-Joachim Schmoll; Manish Shah; Alberto Sobrero; Ioannis Souglakos; Julien Taieb; Atsuo Takashima; Anna Dorothea Wagner; Marc Ychou; Franck Bonnetain; Sophie Gourgou; Takayuki Yoshino; Greg Yothers; Aimery de Gramont; Qian Shi; Thierry André
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  2020-03-12       Impact factor: 9.162

6.  Feasibility and safety of robotic-assisted total pancreatectomy: a pilot western series.

Authors:  Emanuele F Kauffmann; Niccolò Napoli; Valerio Genovese; Michael Ginesini; Cesare Gianfaldoni; Fabio Vistoli; Gabriella Amorese; Ugo Boggi
Journal:  Updates Surg       Date:  2021-05-19

7.  Prognostic nomogram and score to predict overall survival in locally advanced untreated pancreatic cancer (PROLAP).

Authors:  Dewi Vernerey; Florence Huguet; Angélique Vienot; David Goldstein; Sophie Paget-Bailly; Jean-Luc Van Laethem; Bengt Glimelius; Pascal Artru; Malcolm J Moore; Thierry André; Laurent Mineur; Benoist Chibaudel; Magdalena Benetkiewicz; Christophe Louvet; Pascal Hammel; Franck Bonnetain
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2016-07-12       Impact factor: 7.640

8.  Nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine for metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma after Folfirinox failure: an AGEO prospective multicentre cohort.

Authors:  Alix Portal; Simon Pernot; David Tougeron; Claire Arbaud; Anne Thirot Bidault; Christelle de la Fouchardière; Pascal Hammel; Thierry Lecomte; Johann Dréanic; Romain Coriat; Jean-Baptiste Bachet; Olivier Dubreuil; Lysiane Marthey; Laetitia Dahan; Belinda Tchoundjeu; Christophe Locher; Céline Lepère; Franck Bonnetain; Julien Taieb
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2015-09-15       Impact factor: 7.640

9.  A randomized phase II study of weekly nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine or simplified LV5FU2 as first-line therapy in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer: the AFUGEM GERCOR trial.

Authors:  Jean-Baptiste Bachet; Benoist Chibaudel; Franck Bonnetain; Pierre Validire; Pascal Hammel; Thierry André; Christophe Louvet
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2015-10-06       Impact factor: 4.430

10.  Rationale and design of the Adapted Physical Activity in advanced Pancreatic Cancer patients (APACaP) GERCOR (Groupe Coopérateur Multidisciplinaire en Oncologie) trial: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Cindy Neuzillet; Mathieu Vergnault; Franck Bonnetain; Pascal Hammel
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2015-10-12       Impact factor: 2.279

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.