| Literature DB >> 32359501 |
Emmanouil Fokas1, Robert Glynne-Jones2, Ane Appelt3, Regina Beets-Tan4, Geerard Beets5, Karin Haustermans6, Corrie Marijnen7, Bruce D Minsky8, Ethan Ludmir8, Phil Quirke9, David Sebag-Montefiore3, Julio Garcia-Aguilar10, Maria Antonietta Gambacorta11, Vincenzo Valentini11, Marc Buyse12, Claus Rödel13.
Abstract
There is a large variability regarding the definition and choice of primary endpoints in phase 2 and phase 3 multimodal rectal cancer trials, resulting in inconsistency and difficulty of data interpretation. Also, surrogate properties of early and intermediate endpoints have not been systematically assessed. We provide a comprehensive review of clinical and surrogate endpoints used in trials for non-metastatic rectal cancer. The applicability, advantages, and disadvantages of these endpoints are summarised, with recommendations on clinical endpoints for the different phase trials, including limited surgery or non-operative management for organ preservation. We discuss how early and intermediate endpoints, including patient-reported outcomes and involvement of patients in decision making, can be used to guide trial design and facilitate consistency in reporting trial results in rectal cancer.Entities:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32359501 DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(20)30024-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Lancet Oncol ISSN: 1470-2045 Impact factor: 41.316