Literature DB >> 8083702

A decade of breast cancer clinical investigation: results as reported in the Program/Proceedings of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

R T Chlebowski1, L M Lillington.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To test the hypothesis that clinical research results have driven changes in recent breast cancer management recommendations.
METHODS: All breast cancer abstracts in the Program/Proceedings of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) from 1984 to 1993 were prospectively reviewed in 31 areas and categorized by study type, study question, whether statistical significance was claimed, and whether the abstract was presented.
RESULTS: Of 1,372 abstracts, 54% reported on prospective clinical trials (PCTs) and 17% on randomized clinical trials (RCTs). The total number of published abstracts progressively increased (from 87 in 1984 to 221 in 1993) and author citations nearly quadrupled (from 430 in 1984 to 1,642 in 1993, P < .01); however, RCTs have come to represent a smaller proportion of reports: 37% (33 of 89) in 1986 versus 10% (22 of 221) in 1993 (P < .001). The size of adjuvant-therapy RCTs has progressively increased (mean +/- SEM subjects/trial, 237 +/- 43 in 1984 to 874 +/- 374 in 1993), but has remained small in advanced-disease RCTs (mean +/- SEM subjects/trial, 145 +/- 25 in 1984 to 146 +/- 34 in 1993). For adjuvant therapy, 14 of 90 RCTs (with 51,207 patients) reported a significant (P < .05) survival benefit for investigational therapies (16%). For advanced-disease therapy, only three of 141 RCTs (with 26,281 patients) reported a significant (P < .05) survival benefit for investigational therapies (2%). Randomization was rarely used in trials of dose-intensity with blood-product support (zero of 86 trials) or locally advanced disease.
CONCLUSION: For breast cancer ASCO abstracts in the past decade, we determined the following: (1) adjuvant trials have not infrequently supported study hypotheses; and (2) advanced-disease trials have consistently failed to identify new approaches with a significant impact on survival. These results suggest that a critical process evaluation of current policy and procedures involved in directing breast cancer research is warranted, especially for strategies in advanced disease.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1994        PMID: 8083702     DOI: 10.1200/JCO.1994.12.9.1789

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Oncol        ISSN: 0732-183X            Impact factor:   44.544


  9 in total

1.  Locally advanced breast cancer in Saudi Arabia: high frequency of stage III in a young population.

Authors:  A A Ezzat; E M Ibrahim; M A Raja; S Al-Sobhi; A Rostom; R K Stuart
Journal:  Med Oncol       Date:  1999-07       Impact factor: 3.064

2.  Are experimental treatments for cancer in children superior to established treatments? Observational study of randomised controlled trials by the Children's Oncology Group.

Authors:  Ambuj Kumar; Heloisa Soares; Robert Wells; Mike Clarke; Iztok Hozo; Archie Bleyer; Gregory Reaman; Iain Chalmers; Benjamin Djulbegovic
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2005-11-18

3.  Perception of quality of life by patients, partners and treating physicians.

Authors:  K A Wilson; A J Dowling; M Abdolell; I F Tannock
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 4.147

4.  Treatment success in cancer: new cancer treatment successes identified in phase 3 randomized controlled trials conducted by the National Cancer Institute-sponsored cooperative oncology groups, 1955 to 2006.

Authors:  Benjamin Djulbegovic; Ambuj Kumar; Heloisa P Soares; Iztok Hozo; Gerold Bepler; Mike Clarke; Charles L Bennett
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  2008-03-24

Review 5.  Measuring health-related quality of life in clinical trials that evaluate the role of chemotherapy in cancer treatment.

Authors:  M Michael; I F Tannock
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1998-06-30       Impact factor: 8.262

6.  Satisfaction of the uncertainty principle in cancer clinical trials: retrospective cohort analysis.

Authors:  Steven Joffe; David P Harrington; Stephen L George; Ezekiel J Emanuel; Lindsay A Budzinski; Jane C Weeks
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2004-05-26

Review 7.  Treatment success in pragmatic randomised controlled trials: a review of trials funded by the UK Health Technology Assessment programme.

Authors:  Louise Dent; James Raftery
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2011-05-04       Impact factor: 2.279

8.  Relationship between CA 15-3 serum levels and disease extent in predicting overall survival of breast cancer patients with newly diagnosed metastatic disease.

Authors:  M Tampellini; A Berruti; A Gerbino; T Buniva; M Torta; G Gorzegno; R Faggiuolo; R Cannone; A Farris; M Destefanis; G Moro; F Deltetto; L Dogliotti
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  1997       Impact factor: 7.640

9.  The recruitment of patients into clinical trials.

Authors:  I F Tannock
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  1995-06       Impact factor: 7.640

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.