Clinical trial endpoints in metastatic cancer: Using individual participant data to inform future trials methodology Journal Article


Authors: Goldberg, R. M.; Adams, R.; Buyse, M.; Eng, C.; Grothey, A.; André, T.; Sobrero, A. F.; Lichtman, S. M.; Benson, A. B.; Punt, C. J. A.; Maughan, T.; Burzykowski, T.; Sommeijer, D.; Saad, E. D.; Shi, Q.; Coart, E.; Chibaudel, B.; Koopman, M.; Schmoll, H. J.; Yoshino, T.; Taieb, J.; Tebbutt, N. C.; Zalcberg, J.; Tabernero, J.; Van Cutsem, E.; Matheson, A.; de Gramont, A.
Article Title: Clinical trial endpoints in metastatic cancer: Using individual participant data to inform future trials methodology
Abstract: Meta-analysis based on individual participant data (IPD) is a powerful methodology for synthesizing evidence by combining information drawn from multiple trials. Hitherto, its principal application has been in questions of clinical management, but an increasingly important use is in clarifying trials methodology, for instance in the selection of endpoints, as discussed in this review. In oncology, the Aide et Recherche en Cancérologie Digestive (ARCAD) Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Database is a leader in the use of IPD-based meta-analysis in methodological research. The ARCAD database contains IPD from more than 38 000 patients enrolled in 46 studies and continues to collect phase III trial data. Here, we review the principal findings of the ARCAD project in respect of endpoint selection and examine their implications for cancer trials. Analysis of the database has confirmed that progression-free survival (PFS) is no longer a valid surrogate endpoint predictive of overall survival in the first-line treatment of colorectal cancer. Nonetheless, PFS remains an endpoint of choice for most first-line trials in metastatic colorectal cancer and other solid tumors. Only substantial PFS effects are likely to translate into clinically meaningful benefits, and accordingly, we advocate an oncology research model designed to identify highly effective treatments in carefully defined patient groups. We also review the use of the ARCAD database in assessing clinical response including novel response metrics and prognostic markers. These studies demonstrate the value of IPD as a tool for methodological studies and provide a reference point for the expansion of this approach within clinical cancer research. © The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.
Keywords: treatment outcome; research design; methodology; colorectal neoplasms; colorectal tumor; neoplasms, second primary; second cancer; factual database; databases, factual; meta analysis; humans; human
Journal Title: JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute
Volume: 114
Issue: 6
ISSN: 0027-8874
Publisher: Oxford University Press  
Date Published: 2022-06-01
Start Page: 819
End Page: 828
Language: English
DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djab218
PUBMED: 34865086
PROVIDER: scopus
PMCID: PMC9194619
DOI/URL:
Notes: Article -- Export Date: 1 July 2022 -- Source: Scopus
Altmetric
Citation Impact
BMJ Impact Analytics
MSK Authors
  1. Stuart Lichtman
    228 Lichtman