1
|
Shen Q, Gong X, Feng Y, Hu Y, Wang T, Yan W, Zhang W, Qi S, Gale RP, Chen J. Measurable residual disease (MRD)-testing in haematological cancers: A giant leap forward or sideways? Blood Rev 2024:101226. [PMID: 39164126 DOI: 10.1016/j.blre.2024.101226] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/20/2024] [Revised: 08/07/2024] [Accepted: 08/07/2024] [Indexed: 08/22/2024]
Abstract
Measurable residual disease (MRD)-testing is used in many haematological cancers to estimate relapse risk and to direct therapy. Sometimes MRD-test results are used for regulatory approval. However, some people including regulators wrongfully believe results of MRD-testing are highly accurate and of proven efficacy in directing therapy. We review MRD-testing technologies and evaluate the accuracy of MRD-testing for predicting relapse and the strength of evidence supporting efficacy of MRD-guided therapy. We show that at the individual level MRD-test results are often an inaccurate relapse predictor. Also, no convincing data indicate that increasing therapy-intensity based on a positive MRD-test reduces relapse risk or improves survival. We caution against adjusting therapy-intensity based solely on results of MRD-testing.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Qiujin Shen
- State Key Laboratory of Experimental Hematology, National Clinical Research Center for Blood Diseases, Haihe Laboratory of Cell Ecosystem, Institute of Hematology & Blood Diseases Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Tianjin, China; Tianjin Institutes of Health Science, Tianjin, China.
| | - Xiaowen Gong
- State Key Laboratory of Experimental Hematology, National Clinical Research Center for Blood Diseases, Haihe Laboratory of Cell Ecosystem, Institute of Hematology & Blood Diseases Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Tianjin, China; Tianjin Institutes of Health Science, Tianjin, China.
| | - Yahui Feng
- State Key Laboratory of Experimental Hematology, National Clinical Research Center for Blood Diseases, Haihe Laboratory of Cell Ecosystem, Institute of Hematology & Blood Diseases Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Tianjin, China; Tianjin Institutes of Health Science, Tianjin, China.
| | - Yu Hu
- State Key Laboratory of Experimental Hematology, National Clinical Research Center for Blood Diseases, Haihe Laboratory of Cell Ecosystem, Institute of Hematology & Blood Diseases Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Tianjin, China; Tianjin Institutes of Health Science, Tianjin, China.
| | - Tiantian Wang
- State Key Laboratory of Experimental Hematology, National Clinical Research Center for Blood Diseases, Haihe Laboratory of Cell Ecosystem, Institute of Hematology & Blood Diseases Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Tianjin, China; Tianjin Institutes of Health Science, Tianjin, China.
| | - Wen Yan
- State Key Laboratory of Experimental Hematology, National Clinical Research Center for Blood Diseases, Haihe Laboratory of Cell Ecosystem, Institute of Hematology & Blood Diseases Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Tianjin, China; Tianjin Institutes of Health Science, Tianjin, China.
| | - Wei Zhang
- State Key Laboratory of Experimental Hematology, National Clinical Research Center for Blood Diseases, Haihe Laboratory of Cell Ecosystem, Institute of Hematology & Blood Diseases Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Tianjin, China; Tianjin Institutes of Health Science, Tianjin, China.
| | - Saibing Qi
- State Key Laboratory of Experimental Hematology, National Clinical Research Center for Blood Diseases, Haihe Laboratory of Cell Ecosystem, Institute of Hematology & Blood Diseases Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Tianjin, China; Tianjin Institutes of Health Science, Tianjin, China.
| | - Robert Peter Gale
- Centre for Haematology, Department of Immunology and Inflammation, Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine, London, UK.
| | - Junren Chen
- State Key Laboratory of Experimental Hematology, National Clinical Research Center for Blood Diseases, Haihe Laboratory of Cell Ecosystem, Institute of Hematology & Blood Diseases Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Tianjin, China; Tianjin Institutes of Health Science, Tianjin, China.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Brundage MD, Booth CM, Eisenhauer EA, Galica J, Kankesan J, Karim S, Koven R, McDonald V, Ng T, O’Donnell J, ten Hove J, Robinson A. Patients' attitudes and preferences toward delayed disease progression in the absence of improved survival. J Natl Cancer Inst 2023; 115:1526-1534. [PMID: 37458509 PMCID: PMC10699849 DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djad138] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/10/2023] [Revised: 06/27/2023] [Accepted: 07/10/2023] [Indexed: 12/08/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Cancer patients' attitudes toward progression-free survival (PFS) gains offered by treatment are not well understood, particularly in the absence of overall survival (OS) gains. The objectives were to describe patients' willingness to accept treatment that offers PFS gains without OS gains, to compare these findings with treatments offering OS gains, and to qualitatively summarize patients' reasons for their preferences. METHODS A multicenter, cross-sectional, convergent mixed-methods study design recruited patients who had received at least 3 months of systemic therapy for incurable solid tumors. A treatment trade-off exercise determined the gains in imaging PFS that patients require to prefer additional systemic treatment for a scenario of a newly diagnosed, asymptomatic, incurable abdominal tumor. A qualitative, descriptive, thematic analysis explored factors influencing patients' decisions, and a narrative method integrated the quantitative and qualitative findings. RESULTS In total, 100 patients participated (63% were older than 60 years of age). If additional treatment with added toxicity offered no OS advantage, 17% would prefer it for no PFS benefit; 26% for some PFS benefit (range, 3-9 months), whereas 51% would decline it regardless of PFS benefit. Similarly, 71% preferred additional treatment offering a 6-month OS advantage dependent on described toxicity levels (P = .03). A spectrum of reasons for these preferences reflected the complexity of participants' attitudes and values. CONCLUSIONS Prolongation of time to progression was not universally valued. Most patients did not prefer treatments that negatively affect quality of life for PFS gains alone. Implications for individual decision making, policy, and trials research are discussed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michael D Brundage
- Cancer Care and Epidemiology, Queen’s University, Cancer Research Institute, Kingston, ON, Canada
| | - Christopher M Booth
- Cancer Care and Epidemiology, Queen’s University, Cancer Research Institute, Kingston, ON, Canada
| | | | - Jacqueline Galica
- Cancer Care and Epidemiology, Queen’s University, Cancer Research Institute, Kingston, ON, Canada
| | | | | | - Rachel Koven
- Patient Advocate on behalf of Cancer Care and Epidemiology, Queen’s University, Cancer Research Institute, Kingston, ON, Canada
| | - Valerie McDonald
- Patient Advocate on behalf of Cancer Care and Epidemiology, Queen’s University, Cancer Research Institute, Kingston, ON, Canada
| | - Terry Ng
- Division of Medical Oncology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada
| | - Jennifer O’Donnell
- Cancer Care and Epidemiology, Queen’s University, Cancer Research Institute, Kingston, ON, Canada
| | - Julia ten Hove
- Cancer Care and Epidemiology, Queen’s University, Cancer Research Institute, Kingston, ON, Canada
| | - Andrew Robinson
- Cancer Centre of Southeastern Ontario, Kingston General Hospital, Kingston, ON, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Booth CM, Eisenhauer EA, Gyawali B, Tannock IF. Progression-Free Survival Should Not Be Used as a Primary End Point for Registration of Anticancer Drugs. J Clin Oncol 2023; 41:4968-4972. [PMID: 37733981 DOI: 10.1200/jco.23.01423] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 16.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/05/2023] [Revised: 08/07/2023] [Accepted: 08/08/2023] [Indexed: 09/23/2023] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Christopher M Booth
- Division of Cancer Care and Epidemiology, Queen's University Cancer Research Institute, Kingston, Canada
- Department of Oncology, Queen's University, Kingston, Canada
- Department of Public Health Sciences, Queen's University, Kingston, Canada
| | | | - Bishal Gyawali
- Division of Cancer Care and Epidemiology, Queen's University Cancer Research Institute, Kingston, Canada
- Department of Oncology, Queen's University, Kingston, Canada
- Department of Public Health Sciences, Queen's University, Kingston, Canada
| | - Ian F Tannock
- Division of Medical Oncology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre and University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Wu L, Chen J, Cai R, Wang X, Liu Y, Zheng Q, Li L. Difference in Efficacy and Safety of Anti-CD19 Chimeric Antigen Receptor T-Cell Therapy Containing 4-1BB and CD28 Co-Stimulatory Domains for B-Cell Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia. Cancers (Basel) 2023; 15:2767. [PMID: 37345104 DOI: 10.3390/cancers15102767] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/06/2023] [Revised: 05/06/2023] [Accepted: 05/13/2023] [Indexed: 06/23/2023] Open
Abstract
This study quantified the differences in the efficacy and safety of different stimulation domains of anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T therapy for B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (B-ALL). Clinical trials related to anti-CD19 CAR T-cell therapy for B-ALL were searched in public databases from database inception to 13 November 2021. The differences in overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) of B-ALL patients treated with anti-CAR T-cell therapy containing 4-1BB and CD28 co-stimulatory domains were compared by establishing a parametric survival function. The overall remission rate (ORR), the proportion of people with minimal residual disease (MRD)-negative complete remission (CR), the incidence of cytokine release syndrome (CRS), and the neurotoxicity across different co-stimulatory domains was assessed using a random-effects model. The correlation between the ORR, MRD-negative CR, PFS, and OS was tested. The results showed that the median OS of anti-CAR T-cell treatment containing 4-1BB and CD28 co-stimulatory domains was 15.0 months (95% CI: 11.0-20.0) and 8.5 months (95% CI: 5.0-14.0), and the median PFS was 7.0 months (95% CI: 4.0-11.5) and 3.0 months (95% CI: 1.5-7.0), respectively. Anti-CD19 CAR T-cells in the 4-1BB co-stimulatory domain showed superior benefits in patients who achieved ORR. The incidence of neurotoxicity was significantly higher in the CD28 co-stimulatory domain of anti-CD19 CAR T-cells than in the 4-1BB co-stimulatory domain. In addition, the ORR and MRD-negative CR were strongly correlated with OS and PFS, and PFS and OS were strongly correlated. The 4-1BB co-stimulatory domain suggested a better benefit-risk ratio than the CD28 co-stimulatory domain in B-ALL.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lijuan Wu
- Center for Drug Clinical Research, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, No.1200 Cailun Road, Shanghai 201203, China
| | - Junchao Chen
- Center for Drug Clinical Research, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, No.1200 Cailun Road, Shanghai 201203, China
| | - Ruifen Cai
- Center for Drug Clinical Research, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, No.1200 Cailun Road, Shanghai 201203, China
| | - Xinrui Wang
- Center for Drug Clinical Research, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, No.1200 Cailun Road, Shanghai 201203, China
| | - Yixiao Liu
- Center for Drug Clinical Research, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, No.1200 Cailun Road, Shanghai 201203, China
| | - Qingshan Zheng
- Center for Drug Clinical Research, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, No.1200 Cailun Road, Shanghai 201203, China
| | - Lujin Li
- Center for Drug Clinical Research, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, No.1200 Cailun Road, Shanghai 201203, China
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Tervonen T, Veldwijk J, Payne K, Ng X, Levitan B, Lackey LG, Marsh K, Thokala P, Pignatti F, Donnelly A, Ho M. Quantitative Benefit-Risk Assessment in Medical Product Decision Making: A Good Practices Report of an ISPOR Task Force. VALUE IN HEALTH : THE JOURNAL OF THE INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY FOR PHARMACOECONOMICS AND OUTCOMES RESEARCH 2023; 26:449-460. [PMID: 37005055 DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2022.12.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/01/2022] [Accepted: 12/06/2022] [Indexed: 05/06/2023]
Abstract
Benefit-risk assessment is commonly conducted by drug and medical device developers and regulators, to evaluate and communicate issues around benefit-risk balance of medical products. Quantitative benefit-risk assessment (qBRA) is a set of techniques that incorporate explicit outcome weighting within a formal analysis to evaluate the benefit-risk balance. This report describes emerging good practices for the 5 main steps of developing qBRAs based on the multicriteria decision analysis process. First, research question formulation needs to identify the needs of decision makers and requirements for preference data and specify the role of external experts. Second, the formal analysis model should be developed by selecting benefit and safety endpoints while eliminating double counting and considering attribute value dependence. Third, preference elicitation method needs to be chosen, attributes framed appropriately within the elicitation instrument, and quality of the data should be evaluated. Fourth, analysis may need to normalize the preference weights, base-case and sensitivity analyses should be conducted, and the effect of preference heterogeneity analyzed. Finally, results should be communicated efficiently to decision makers and other stakeholders. In addition to detailed recommendations, we provide a checklist for reporting qBRAs developed through a Delphi process conducted with 34 experts.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Jorien Veldwijk
- Erasmus School of Health Policy and Management & Erasmus Choice Modelling Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Katherine Payne
- Manchester Centre for Health Economics, School of Health Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, England, UK
| | - Xinyi Ng
- Office of Biostatistics and Pharmacovigilance, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD, USA
| | | | - Leila G Lackey
- Decision Support and Analysis Staff, Office of Program and Strategic Analysis, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD, USA
| | | | - Praveen Thokala
- School of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, England, UK
| | | | - Anne Donnelly
- Patient Council of the Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson's Research, New York, NY, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
6
|
Davis C, Wagner AK, Salcher-Konrad M, Scowcroft H, Mintzes B, Pokorny AMJ, Lew J, Naci H. Communication of anticancer drug benefits and related uncertainties to patients and clinicians: document analysis of regulated information on prescription drugs in Europe. BMJ 2023; 380:e073711. [PMID: 36990506 PMCID: PMC10053600 DOI: 10.1136/bmj-2022-073711] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 03/31/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To evaluate the frequency with which relevant and accurate information about the benefits and related uncertainties of anticancer drugs are communicated to patients and clinicians in regulated information sources in Europe. DESIGN Document content analysis. SETTING European Medicines Agency. PARTICIPANTS Anticancer drugs granted a first marketing authorisation by the European Medicines Agency, 2017-19. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Whether written information on a product addressed patients' commonly asked questions about: who and what the drug is used for; how the drug was studied; types of drug benefit expected; and the extent of weak, uncertain, or missing evidence for drug benefits. Information on drug benefits in written sources for clinicians (summaries of product characteristics), patients (patient information leaflets), and the public (public summaries) was compared with information reported in regulatory assessment documents (European public assessment reports). RESULTS 29 anticancer drugs that received a first marketing authorisation for 32 separate cancer indications in 2017-19 were included. General information about the drug (including information on approved indications and how the drug works) was frequently reported across regulated information sources aimed at both clinicians and patients. Nearly all summaries of product characteristics communicated full information to clinicians about the number and design of the main studies, the control arm (if any), study sample size, and primary measures of drug benefit. None of the patient information leaflets communicated information to patients about how drugs were studied. 31 (97%) summaries of product characteristics and 25 (78%) public summaries contained information about drug benefits that was accurate and consistent with information in regulatory assessment documents. The presence or absence of evidence that a drug extended survival was reported in 23 (72%) summaries of product characteristics and four (13%) public summaries. None of the patient information leaflets communicated information about the drug benefits that patients might expect based on study findings. Scientific concerns about the reliability of evidence on drug benefits, which were raised by European regulatory assessors for almost all drugs in the study sample, were rarely communicated to clinicians, patients, or the public. CONCLUSIONS The findings of this study highlight the need to improve the communication of the benefits and related uncertainties of anticancer drugs in regulated information sources in Europe to support evidence informed decision making by patients and their clinicians.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Courtney Davis
- Department of Global Health and Social Medicine, King's College London, London, UK
| | - Anita K Wagner
- Department of Population Medicine, Harvard Medical School, and Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute, Boston, MA, USA
| | | | - Henry Scowcroft
- Alzheimer's Research UK, Cambridge, UK
- National Cancer Research Institute Bladder and Renal Research Group, London, UK
| | - Barbara Mintzes
- School of Pharmacy, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Adrian M J Pokorny
- School of Pharmacy, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
- Alice Springs Hospital, Northern Territory, Australia
| | - Jianhui Lew
- Department of Health Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK
| | - Huseyin Naci
- Department of Health Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Yao H, Hou Y, Zhang X, Zhang Q. Extrinsic emotional regulation experienced by lung cancer patients and their family caregivers during progression‐free survival. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) 2022; 31:e13750. [DOI: 10.1111/ecc.13750] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/13/2022] [Revised: 09/30/2022] [Accepted: 10/09/2022] [Indexed: 01/10/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Hong Yao
- School of Ethnology and Sociology Minzu University of China Beijing China
| | - Yajie Hou
- China Population and Development Research Center Beijing China
| | - Xinqian Zhang
- School of Ethnology and Sociology Minzu University of China Beijing China
| | - Qianqian Zhang
- Department of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine Zhengzhou University People's Hospital Zhengzhou Henan China
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Building Awareness of Diagnosis Together: Ambiguity During Progression-Free Survival Experienced by Patients With Lung Cancer and Caregivers in China. Cancer Nurs 2022; 46:198-206. [PMID: 35353739 DOI: 10.1097/ncc.0000000000001084] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Lung cancer, as a multistep and multifactorial disease, is among the most fatal cancers worldwide. As new therapies are developed and early screening increases, patients tend to experience progression-free survival (PFS) as a coexistence of living and dying simultaneously. OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to explore the awareness context experienced by Chinese elderly patients and family members. METHODS Interviews were conducted with 20 interviewees, including 13 elderly patients with lung cancer and 7 caregivers that were recruited using purposive sampling. Semistructured, face-to-face, in-depth interviews were conducted using a qualitative descriptive approach. RESULTS Ambiguity was commonly experienced by patients with lung cancer with PFS. Three themes emerged from the data analysis: "ambiguity in cancer diagnosis," "ambiguity in prognostic awareness," and "ambiguity in identity." In this case, ambiguity refers to a situation or context in which patients are uncertain about whether there will be a recurrence of their cancer and when it might occur. CONCLUSIONS The findings highlighted that patients experienced ambiguity in response to unclear diagnoses, uncertain prognoses, and identity crises during PFS. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE Healthcare teams should be equipped with psychosocial knowledge and communication skills to manage ambiguity in diagnosis and prognosis for patients with PFS.
Collapse
|
9
|
Gyawali B, Eisenhauer E, Tregear M, Booth CM. Progression-free survival: it is time for a new name. Lancet Oncol 2022; 23:328-330. [DOI: 10.1016/s1470-2045(22)00015-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/16/2021] [Accepted: 12/22/2021] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
|
10
|
Patient perspectives of value of delayed disease progression on imaging (imaging PFS). A treatment trade-off experiment. J Cancer Policy 2021; 30:100301. [DOI: 10.1016/j.jcpo.2021.100301] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/02/2021] [Revised: 07/19/2021] [Accepted: 08/16/2021] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
|
11
|
Al Hadidi S. The Use of Modified Surrogate End Points in Cancer Clinical Trials. Cancer Invest 2021; 40:14-16. [PMID: 34775893 DOI: 10.1080/07357907.2021.2006683] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/19/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Samer Al Hadidi
- Myeloma Center, Winthrop P. Rockefeller Cancer Institute, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, AR, USA
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
The Importance of Disease-Free Survival as a Clinical Trial Endpoint: A Qualitative Study Among Canadian Survivors of Lung Cancer. PATIENT-PATIENT CENTERED OUTCOMES RESEARCH 2021; 15:307-316. [PMID: 34643935 DOI: 10.1007/s40271-021-00552-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 09/19/2021] [Indexed: 10/20/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND In lung cancer trials, overall survival is a well-validated and widely used endpoint; yet, in the context of adjuvant or curative intent treatments, disease-free survival (DFS) may be a better indicator of transformative patient outcomes. Although use of DFS is growing, patient perceptions of its relevance have not been established. OBJECTIVE We aimed to understand the importance of DFS as a trial endpoint, from the perspective of survivors of lung cancer. METHODS Web-based qualitative interviews were conducted with Canadian survivors of stage Ib-IIIa lung cancer. Participants described their experiences of cancer diagnosis and treatment, including their treatment goals and priorities. Participants then provided their perspectives on DFS and overall survival, and how well each aligned with their treatment priorities. Thematic analysis was used to explore patterns in responses. RESULTS Among the 18 participants (mean age, 64 years), 83% were female, most (89%) had received surgery, and 56% received chemotherapy. Most participants viewed DFS as an intrinsically meaningful treatment outcome, for reasons such as alignment with treatment goals, and the perception that DFS would help maintain a high quality of life. One individual was interested in DFS only as a potential surrogate for overall survival. Participants desired access to new treatments that improve DFS and emphasized this within the context of promoting patient agency in treatment decision making. CONCLUSIONS These findings suggest DFS is a meaningful endpoint from the perspective of survivors of lung cancer; and may help inform decisions regarding regulatory approval and reimbursement of new treatments based on DFS data.
Collapse
|
13
|
Dawoud D, Naci H, Ciani O, Bujkiewicz S. Raising the bar for using surrogate endpoints in drug regulation and health technology assessment. BMJ 2021; 374:n2191. [PMID: 34526320 DOI: 10.1136/bmj.n2191] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/21/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Dalia Dawoud
- Science, Evidence and Analytics Directorate, Science Policy and Research Programme, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, London, UK
| | - Huseyin Naci
- Department of Health Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK
| | - Oriana Ciani
- Centre for Research on Health and Social Care Management, SDA Bocconi, Milan, Italy
- College of Medicine and Health, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Sylwia Bujkiewicz
- Biostatistics Research Group, Department of Health Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Sugitani Y, Ito K, Ono S. Patient Preferences for Attributes of Chemotherapy for Lung Cancer: Discrete Choice Experiment Study in Japan. Front Pharmacol 2021; 12:697711. [PMID: 34354590 PMCID: PMC8329447 DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2021.697711] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/20/2021] [Accepted: 07/06/2021] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Our study objective was to determine lung cancer chemotherapy attributes that are important to patients in Japan. A discrete choice experiment survey in an anonymous web-based questionnaire format with a reward was completed by 200 lung cancer patients in Japan from November 25, 2019, to November 27, 2019. The relative importance of patient preferences for each attribute was estimated using a conditional logit model. A hierarchical Bayesian logit model was also used to estimate the impact of each demographic characteristic on the relative importance of each attribute. Of the 200 respondents, 191 with consistent responses were included in the analysis. In their preference, overall survival was the most important, followed by diarrhea, nausea, rash, bone marrow suppression (BMS), progression-free survival, fatigue, interstitial lung disease, frequency of administration, and duration of administration. The preferences were influenced by demographic characteristics (e.g., gender and age) and disease background (e.g., cancer type and stage). Interestingly, the experience of cancer drug therapies and adverse events had a substantial impact on the hypothetical drug preferences. For the Japanese lung cancer patients, improved survival was the most important attribute that influenced their preference for chemotherapy, followed by adverse events, including diarrhea, nausea, rash, and BMS. The preferences varied depending on the patient’s demographic and experience. As drug attributes can affect patient preferences, pharmaceutical companies should be aware of the patient preferences and develop drugs that respond to segmented market needs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yasuo Sugitani
- Biometrics Department, Chugai Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Tokyo, Japan.,Laboratory of Pharmaceutical Regulation and Sciences, Graduate School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Kyoko Ito
- Sustainability Department, Chugai Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Tokyo, Japan
| | - Shunsuke Ono
- Laboratory of Pharmaceutical Regulation and Sciences, Graduate School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Younger E, Husson O, van der Graaf WTA. Clinical Trials for Real-World Elderly Patients With Metastatic Soft-Tissue Sarcomas: The Importance of Study Design and Patient-Reported Outcomes. J Clin Oncol 2021; 39:860-861. [PMID: 33439691 DOI: 10.1200/jco.20.02747] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Eugenie Younger
- Eugenie Younger, MD, Sarcoma Unit, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom; Olga Husson, PhD, Division of Clinical Studies, Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom; Department of Medical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands, and Winette T. A. van der Graaf, MD, PhD; Department of Medical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Olga Husson
- Eugenie Younger, MD, Sarcoma Unit, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom; Olga Husson, PhD, Division of Clinical Studies, Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom; Department of Medical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands, and Winette T. A. van der Graaf, MD, PhD; Department of Medical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Winette T A van der Graaf
- Eugenie Younger, MD, Sarcoma Unit, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom; Olga Husson, PhD, Division of Clinical Studies, Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom; Department of Medical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands, and Winette T. A. van der Graaf, MD, PhD; Department of Medical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Rodriguez A, Esposito F, Oliveres H, Torres F, Maurel J. Are Quality of Randomized Clinical Trials and ESMO-Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale Two Sides of the Same Coin, to Grade Recommendations for Drug Approval? J Clin Med 2021; 10:746. [PMID: 33668473 PMCID: PMC7918206 DOI: 10.3390/jcm10040746] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/06/2021] [Revised: 02/06/2021] [Accepted: 02/11/2021] [Indexed: 12/20/2022] Open
Abstract
The approval of a new drug for cancer treatment by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA) is based on positive, well-designed randomized phase III clinical trials (RCTs). However, not all of them are analyzed to support the recommendations. For this reason, there are different scales to quantify and evaluate the quality of RCTs and the magnitude of the clinical benefits of new drugs for treating solid tumors. In this review, we discuss the value of the progression-free survival (PFS) as an endpoint in RCTs and the concordance between it and the overall survival (OS) as a measure of the quality of clinical trial designs. We summarize and analyze the different scales to evaluate the clinical benefits of new drugs such as the The American Society of Clinical Oncology value framework (ASCO-VF-NHB16) and European Society for Medical Oncology Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS) and the concordance between them, focusing on metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). We propose several definitions that would help to evaluate the quality of RCT, the magnitude of clinical benefit and the appropriate approval of new drugs in oncology.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Adela Rodriguez
- Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital Clinic of Barcelona,08036 Barcelona, Spain; (A.R.); (F.E.); (H.O.)
- Translational Genomics and Targeted Therapeutics in Solid Tumors Group, Institut d’Investigació Biomèdica August Pi i Sunyer (IDIBAPS), 08036 Barcelona, Spain
- Department of Medicine, University of Barcelona, 08036 Barcelona, Spain
- Medical Statistics Core Facility, IDIBAPS, Hospital Clinic, 08036 Barcelona, Spain
| | - Francis Esposito
- Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital Clinic of Barcelona,08036 Barcelona, Spain; (A.R.); (F.E.); (H.O.)
- Translational Genomics and Targeted Therapeutics in Solid Tumors Group, Institut d’Investigació Biomèdica August Pi i Sunyer (IDIBAPS), 08036 Barcelona, Spain
- Department of Medicine, University of Barcelona, 08036 Barcelona, Spain
- Medical Statistics Core Facility, IDIBAPS, Hospital Clinic, 08036 Barcelona, Spain
| | - Helena Oliveres
- Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital Clinic of Barcelona,08036 Barcelona, Spain; (A.R.); (F.E.); (H.O.)
- Translational Genomics and Targeted Therapeutics in Solid Tumors Group, Institut d’Investigació Biomèdica August Pi i Sunyer (IDIBAPS), 08036 Barcelona, Spain
- Department of Medicine, University of Barcelona, 08036 Barcelona, Spain
- Medical Statistics Core Facility, IDIBAPS, Hospital Clinic, 08036 Barcelona, Spain
| | - Ferran Torres
- Biostatistics Unit, Faculty of Medicine, Autonomous University of Barcelona, 08036 Barcelona, Spain
| | - Joan Maurel
- Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital Clinic of Barcelona,08036 Barcelona, Spain; (A.R.); (F.E.); (H.O.)
- Translational Genomics and Targeted Therapeutics in Solid Tumors Group, Institut d’Investigació Biomèdica August Pi i Sunyer (IDIBAPS), 08036 Barcelona, Spain
- Department of Medicine, University of Barcelona, 08036 Barcelona, Spain
- Medical Statistics Core Facility, IDIBAPS, Hospital Clinic, 08036 Barcelona, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Wayant C, Aran G, Johnson BS, Vassar M. Evaluation of Selective Outcome Reporting Bias in Efficacy Endpoints in Print and Television Advertisements for Oncology Drugs. J Gen Intern Med 2020; 35:2853-2857. [PMID: 32661931 PMCID: PMC7572986 DOI: 10.1007/s11606-020-06028-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/01/2019] [Accepted: 06/30/2020] [Indexed: 10/23/2022]
Abstract
IMPORTANCE Selective outcome reporting bias in oncology drug advertisements may encourage misconceptions about a drug's efficacy profile. OBJECTIVE We sought to determine the rates of selective outcome reporting in published cancer clinical trials and in television and print advertisements for anticancer medications. We also quantified the number of advertisements that did not include or cite any studies with mature overall survival (OS) data (i.e., data with all required patient events for final analysis). DESIGN/SETTING/PARTICIPANTS We conducted a cross-sectional investigation of advertisements uploaded to the AdPharm Database (repository of pharmaceutical advertisements); the clinical trials supporting the ads; and the trial registrations associated with the trials. Data were extracted by two investigators who were blinded to each other's data. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES The first co-primary objective was to investigate selective outcome reporting between trial registrations and published trials. The second co-primary objective was to investigate selective outcome reporting between the same published trials and drug advertisements. RESULTS We included 74 advertisements and 48 clinical trials. Print ads were the most common (n = 66), and most print advertisements were targeted to health care providers (n = 55, 83.3%). Overall, 41/48 (85.4%) trials were registered prior to study enrollment, and 41/48 (85.4%) did not deviate from the registered primary endpoints. Across all advertisements (n = 74), statistically significant endpoints were more often reported (unadjusted risk ratio [uRR] 1.26; 95% confidence interval [CI] (1.14-1.40)) and 22/55 (40.0%) advertisements cited trials with immature overall survival data (i.e., data without the required number of events for final analysis). CONCLUSIONS In our sample, statistically significant endpoints were more commonly reported than nonsignificant endpoints. Immature endpoints (those analyzed before the required number of accrued patient events) were often reported. By reporting only significant endpoints and those that are immature, advertisers may encourage misconceptions about a drug's efficacy profile.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Cole Wayant
- Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Oklahoma State University Center for Health Sciences , Tulsa, OK, USA.
| | - Greg Aran
- Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Oklahoma State University Center for Health Sciences , Tulsa, OK, USA
| | - Bradley S Johnson
- Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Oklahoma State University Center for Health Sciences , Tulsa, OK, USA
| | - Matt Vassar
- Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Oklahoma State University Center for Health Sciences , Tulsa, OK, USA
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Pasalic D, McGinnis GJ, Fuller CD, Grossberg AJ, Verma V, Mainwaring W, Miller AB, Lin TA, Jethanandani A, Espinoza AF, Diefenhardt M, Das P, Subbiah V, Subbiah IM, Jagsi R, Garden AS, Fokas E, Rödel C, Thomas CR, Minsky BD, Ludmir EB. Progression-free survival is a suboptimal predictor for overall survival among metastatic solid tumour clinical trials. Eur J Cancer 2020; 136:176-185. [PMID: 32702645 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2020.06.015] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/13/2020] [Revised: 06/01/2020] [Accepted: 06/11/2020] [Indexed: 01/17/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The use of overall survival (OS) as the gold standard primary end-point (PEP) in metastatic oncologic randomised controlled trials (RCTs) has declined in favour of progression-free survival (PFS) without a complete understanding of the degree to which PFS reliably predicts for OS. METHODS Using ClinicalTrials.gov, we identified 1239 phase III oncologic RCTs, 260 of which were metastatic solid tumour trials with a superiority-design investigating a therapeutic intervention by using either a PFS or OS PEP. Each individual trial was reviewed to quantify RCT design factors and disease-related outcomes. RESULTS A total of 172,133 patients were enrolled from the year 1999 to 2015 in RCTs that used PFS (56.2%, 146/260) or OS (43.8%, 114/260) as the PEP. PFS trials were more likely to restrict patient eligibility by using molecular criteria (15.1% versus 4.4%, p = 0.005) use targeted therapy (80.1% versus 67.5%, p = 0.048), accrue fewer patients (median 495 versus 619, p = 0.03), and successfully meet the trial PEP (66.9% versus 33.3%, p < 0.0001). On multiple binary logistic regression analysis, factors that predicted for PFS or OS PEP trial success included choice of PFS PEP (p < 0.0001), molecular profile restriction (p = 0.02) and single agent therapy (p = 0.02). Notably, there was only a 38% (31/82) conversion rate of positive PFS-to-OS benefit; lack of industry sponsorship predicted for PFS-to-OS signal conversion (80.0% without industry sponsorship versus 35.1% with industry sponsorship, p = 0.045). CONCLUSIONS A PFS PEP has suboptimal positive predictive value for OS among phase III metastatic solid tumour RCTs. Regulatory agency decisions should be judicious in using PFS results as the primary basis for approval.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dario Pasalic
- The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | | | - C David Fuller
- The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | | | - Vivek Verma
- Allegheny Health Network Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| | | | - Austin B Miller
- The University of Texas Health Science Center, McGovern Medical School, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Timothy A Lin
- The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | | | | | - Markus Diefenhardt
- University of Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany; Frankfurt Cancer Institute, Frankfurt, Germany
| | - Prajnan Das
- The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Vivek Subbiah
- The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | | | | | - Adam S Garden
- The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Emmanouil Fokas
- University of Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany; Frankfurt Cancer Institute, Frankfurt, Germany; German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany; German Cancer Consortium, Frankfurt, Germany
| | - Claus Rödel
- University of Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany; Frankfurt Cancer Institute, Frankfurt, Germany; German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany; German Cancer Consortium, Frankfurt, Germany
| | | | - Bruce D Minsky
- The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Ethan B Ludmir
- The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Zhu J, Yang Y, Tao J, Wang SL, Chen B, Dai JR, Hu C, Qi SN, Li YX. Association of progression-free or event-free survival with overall survival in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma after immunochemotherapy: a systematic review. Leukemia 2020; 34:2576-2591. [PMID: 32651542 PMCID: PMC7515849 DOI: 10.1038/s41375-020-0963-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/17/2020] [Accepted: 07/01/2020] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
Abstract
To investigate progression-free survival (PFS) and event-free survival (EFS) as early efficacy endpoints in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), this systematic review included phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs), phase II trials, and retrospective studies in newly diagnosed DLBCL receiving rituximab-containing chemotherapy through databases search up to 2019. Quality control was performed, where studies with high risk of bias were excluded. Prediction models were first established using the RCTs, and then externally validated in the phase II and retrospective populations. Trial-level surrogacy analysis was conducted by correlating the logarithmic (log) hazard ratio (HR) for PFS or EFS and log HR for OS. Correlation analysis at treatment arm-level was performed between 1-, 2-, 3-, and 5-year PFS or EFS rates and 5-year OS. The correlation was evaluated using the Pearson correlation coefficient r in weighted linear regression, with weight equal to patient size. Sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the consistency of predictive model by leaving one subgroup of trials out at a time. Twenty-six phase III RCTs, 4 phase II trials and 47 retrospective studies were included. In trial-level surrogacy, PFS (r, 0.772; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.471-0.913) or EFS (r, 0.838; 95% CI, 0.625-0.938) were associated with OS. For rituximab immunochemotherapy treatment arms in RCTs, there was a linear correlation between 1 and 5-year PFS (r, 0.813-0.873) or EFS (r, 0.853-0.931) and 5-year OS. Sensitivity analysis demonstrated reasonable overall consistency. The correlation between PFS and OS was externally validated using independent phase II, and retrospective data (r, 0.795-0.897). We recommend PFS and EFS as earlier efficacy endpoints in patients with DLBCL primarily treated with rituximab-containing immunochemotherapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jie Zhu
- National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Beijing, P.R. China.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Sichuan Cancer Hospital and Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, P.R. China
| | - Yong Yang
- National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Beijing, P.R. China
| | - Jin Tao
- Institute of Basic Medical Sciences, Department of Human Anatomy, Histology and Embryology, Neuroscience Center, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, School of Basic Medicine, Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, P.R. China
| | - Shu-Lian Wang
- National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Beijing, P.R. China
| | - Bo Chen
- National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Beijing, P.R. China
| | - Jian-Rong Dai
- National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Beijing, P.R. China
| | - Chen Hu
- Division of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
| | - Shu-Nan Qi
- National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Beijing, P.R. China.
| | - Ye-Xiong Li
- National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Beijing, P.R. China.
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
|
21
|
Affiliation(s)
- Huseyin Naci
- Department of Health Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK
| | - Courtney Davis
- Department of Global Health and Social Medicine, King's College London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
von Itzstein MS, Railey E, Smith ML, White CB, Sledge GW, Howell JR, Lawton W, Marinucci DM, Unni N, Gerber DE. Patient familiarity with, understanding of, and preferences for clinical trial endpoints and terminology. Cancer 2020; 126:1605-1613. [PMID: 31967687 DOI: 10.1002/cncr.32730] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/11/2019] [Revised: 12/10/2019] [Accepted: 12/16/2019] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Although there is increased attention to designing and explaining clinical trials in ways that are clinically meaningful for patients, there is limited information on patient preferences, understanding, and perceptions of this content. METHODS Maximum difference scaling (MaxDiff) methodology was used to develop a survey for assessing patients' understanding of 19 clinical terms and perceived importance of 9 endpoint surrogate phrases used in clinical trials and consent forms. The survey was administered electronically to individuals with metastatic breast cancer affiliated with the Metastatic Breast Cancer Alliance. Analyses were performed using Bayesian P values with statistical software. RESULTS Among 503 respondents, 77% had a college degree, 70% were diagnosed with metastatic disease ≥2 years before survey completion, and 77% had received ≥2 lines of systemic therapy. Less than 35% of respondents reported understanding "fairly well" the terms symptomatic progression, duration of disease control, time to treatment cessation, and endpoints. Income level and time since onset of metastatic disease correlated with comprehension. Patients who had received ≥6 lines of therapy perceived that time until serious side effects (P < .001) and time on therapy (P < .001) were more important compared with those who had received only 1 line of therapy. Positively phrased parameters were associated with increased perceived importance. CONCLUSIONS Even among educated, heavily pretreated patients, many commonly used clinical research terms are poorly understood. Comprehension and the perceived importance of trial endpoints vary over the course of disease. These observations may inform the design, discussion, and reporting of clinical trials.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mitchell S von Itzstein
- Department of Internal Medicine, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas
| | | | | | - Carol B White
- Research Advocacy Network, Plano, Texas
- CBWhite, Evanston, Illinois
| | - George W Sledge
- Research Advocacy Network, Plano, Texas
- Stanford University Medical Center, Palo Alto, California
| | - John R Howell
- Research Advocacy Network, Plano, Texas
- Marriott School of Business, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah
| | | | - Donna M Marinucci
- Research Advocacy Network, Plano, Texas
- College of Medicine, Drexel University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Nisha Unni
- Department of Internal Medicine, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas
- Harold C. Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas
| | - David E Gerber
- Department of Internal Medicine, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas
- Research Advocacy Network, Plano, Texas
- Harold C. Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas
- Department of Population and Data Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Janssen EM, Dy SM, Meara AS, Kneuertz PJ, Presley CJ, Bridges JFP. Analysis of Patient Preferences in Lung Cancer - Estimating Acceptable Tradeoffs Between Treatment Benefit and Side Effects. Patient Prefer Adherence 2020; 14:927-937. [PMID: 32581519 PMCID: PMC7276327 DOI: 10.2147/ppa.s235430] [Citation(s) in RCA: 40] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/24/2019] [Accepted: 04/28/2020] [Indexed: 02/02/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Increased treatment options and longer survival for lung cancer have generated increased interest in patient preferences. Previous studies of patient preferences in lung cancer have not fully explored preference heterogeneity. We demonstrate a method to explore preference heterogeneity in the willingness of patients with lung cancer and caregivers to trade progression-free survival (PFS) with side effects. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients and caregivers attending a national lung cancer meeting completed a discrete-choice experiment (DCE) designed through a collaboration with patients. Participants answered 13 choice tasks described across PFS, short-term side effects, and four long-term side effects. Side effects were coded as a one-level change in severity (none-mild, mild-moderate, or moderate-severe). A mixed logit model in willingness-to-pay space estimated preference heterogeneity in acceptable tradeoffs (time equivalents) between PFS and side effects. The study was reported following quality indicators from the United States Food and Drug Administration's patient preference guidance. RESULTS A total of 87 patients and 24 caregivers participated in the DCE. Participants would trade 3.7 month PFS (95% CI (CI): 3.3-4.1) for less severe functional long-term treatment side effects, 2.3 months for less severe physical long-term effects (CI: 1.9-2.8) and cognitive long-term effects (CI: 1.8-2.8), 0.9 months (CI: 0.4-1.4) for less severe emotional long-term effects, and 1.8 months (CI: 1.4-2.3) for less severe short-term side effects. Most participants (90%) would accept treatment with more severe functional long-term effects for 8.4 additional month PFS. CONCLUSION Participants would trade PFS for changes in short-term side effects and long-term side effects, although preference heterogeneity existed. Lung cancer treatments that offer less PFS but also less severe side effects might be acceptable to some patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ellen M Janssen
- Center for Medical Technology Policy, Baltimore, MD, USA
- Correspondence: Ellen M Janssen Research Director,Center for Medical Technology Policy, 401 East Pratt Street, Suite 631, Baltimore, MD21202, USATel +1 443-222-8775 Email
| | - Sydney M Dy
- Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Alexa S Meara
- Department of Internal Medicine Division Of Rheumatology, The Ohio State University, College of Medicine, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Peter J Kneuertz
- Thoracic Surgery Division, Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Carolyn J Presley
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - John F P Bridges
- Department of Biomedical Informatics, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH, USA
- Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH, USA
| |
Collapse
|