Literature DB >> 35583264

Clinical Benefit Scales and Trial Design: Some Statistical Issues.

Edward L Korn1, Carmen J Allegra2,3, Boris Freidlin1.   

Abstract

Recently developed clinical-benefit outcome scales by the European Society for Medical Oncology and the American Society of Clinical Oncology allow standardized objective evaluation of outcomes of randomized clinical trials. However, incorporation of clinical-benefit outcome scales into trial designs highlights a number of statistical issues: the relationship between minimal clinical benefit and the target treatment-effect alternative used in the trial design, designing trials to assess long-term benefit, potential problems with using a trial endpoint that is not overall survival, and how to incorporate subgroup analyses into the trial design. Using the European Society for Medical Oncology Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale as a basis for discussion, we review what these issues are and how they can guide the choice of trial-design target effects, appropriate endpoints, and prespecified subgroup analyses to increase the chances that the resulting trial outcomes can be appropriately evaluated for clinical benefit. Published by Oxford University Press 2022.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35583264      PMCID: PMC9468283          DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djac099

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst        ISSN: 0027-8874            Impact factor:   11.816


  50 in total

1.  Surrogate endpoint analysis: an exercise in extrapolation.

Authors:  Stuart G Baker; Barnett S Kramer
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2012-12-21       Impact factor: 13.506

2.  Updating the American Society of Clinical Oncology Value Framework: Revisions and Reflections in Response to Comments Received.

Authors:  Lowell E Schnipper; Nancy E Davidson; Dana S Wollins; Douglas W Blayney; Adam P Dicker; Patricia A Ganz; J Russell Hoverman; Robert Langdon; Gary H Lyman; Neal J Meropol; Therese Mulvey; Lee Newcomer; Jeffrey Peppercorn; Blase Polite; Derek Raghavan; Gregory Rossi; Leonard Saltz; Deborah Schrag; Thomas J Smith; Peter P Yu; Clifford A Hudis; Julie M Vose; Richard L Schilsky
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2016-05-31       Impact factor: 44.544

3.  The use of predicted confidence intervals when planning experiments and the misuse of power when interpreting results.

Authors:  S N Goodman; J A Berlin
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1994-08-01       Impact factor: 25.391

4.  End points and United States Food and Drug Administration approval of oncology drugs.

Authors:  John R Johnson; Grant Williams; Richard Pazdur
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2003-04-01       Impact factor: 44.544

5.  Five years of EMA-approved systemic cancer therapies for solid tumours-a comparison of two thresholds for meaningful clinical benefit.

Authors:  N Grössmann; J C Del Paggio; S Wolf; R Sullivan; C M Booth; K Rosian; R Emprechtinger; C Wild
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  2017-07-10       Impact factor: 9.162

Review 6.  Biomarker enrichment strategies: matching trial design to biomarker credentials.

Authors:  Boris Freidlin; Edward L Korn
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2013-11-26       Impact factor: 66.675

7.  Assessing the benefit of cancer drugs approved by the European Medicines Agency using the European Society for Medical Oncology Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale over time.

Authors:  Sasha Thomson; Noah Witzke; Bishal Gyawali; Seanthel Delos Santos; Suji Udayakumar; Claudia Cardone; Matthew C Cheung; Kelvin K W Chan
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  2021-04-28       Impact factor: 9.162

8.  An Appraisal of Clinically Meaningful Outcomes Guidelines for Oncology Clinical Trials.

Authors:  Hemanth Kumar; Tito Fojo; Sham Mailankody
Journal:  JAMA Oncol       Date:  2016-09-01       Impact factor: 31.777

9.  A Problematic Biomarker Trial Design.

Authors:  Boris Freidlin; Edward L Korn
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2022-02-07       Impact factor: 13.506

Review 10.  Biases in study design, implementation, and data analysis that distort the appraisal of clinical benefit and ESMO-Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS) scoring.

Authors:  B Gyawali; E G E de Vries; U Dafni; T Amaral; J Barriuso; J Bogaerts; A Calles; G Curigliano; C Gomez-Roca; B Kiesewetter; S Oosting; A Passaro; G Pentheroudakis; M Piccart; F Roitberg; J Tabernero; N Tarazona; D Trapani; R Wester; G Zarkavelis; C Zielinski; P Zygoura; N I Cherny
Journal:  ESMO Open       Date:  2021-04-19
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.