External Control Arms in Oncology: Current Use and Future Directions

Examining the Effect of Missing Data and Unmeasured Confounding on External Comparator Studies: Case Studies and Simulations

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Missing data and unmeasured confounding are key challenges for external comparator studies. This work evaluates bias and other performance characteristics depending on missingness and unmeasured confounding by means of two case studies and simulations.

METHODS

Two case studies were constructed by taking the treatment arms from two randomised controlled trials and an external real-world data source that exhibited substantial missingness. The indications of the randomised controlled trials were multiple myeloma and metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer. Overall survival was taken as the main endpoint. The effects of missing data and unmeasured confounding were assessed for the case studies by reporting estimated external comparator versus randomised controlled trial treatment effects. Based on the two case studies, simulations were performed broadening the settings by varying the underlying hazard ratio, the sample size, the sample size ratio between the experimental arm and the external comparator, the number of missing covariates and the percentage of missingness. Thereby, bias and other performance metrics could be quantified dependent on these factors.

RESULTS

For the multiple myeloma external comparator study, results were in line with the randomised controlled trial, despite missingness and potential unmeasured confounding, while for the metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer case study missing data led to a low sample size, leading overall to inconclusive results. Furthermore, for the metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer study, missing data in important eligibility criteria led to further limitations. Simulations were successfully applied to gain a quantitative understanding of the effects of missing data and unmeasured confounding.

CONCLUSIONS

This exploratory study confirmed external comparator strengths and limitations by quantifying the impact of missing data and unmeasured confounding using case studies and simulations. In particular, missing data in key eligibility criteria were seen to limit the ability to derive the external comparator target analysis population accurately, while simulations demonstrated the magnitude of bias to expect for various settings.

Efficacy and Safety of Bispecific T-Cell Engagers in Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma: A Real-World Data-Based Case-Controlled Study

Although bispecific T-cell engager (BiTE) is a promising treatment for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM), it needs to be evaluated in a real-world setting. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of BiTEs compared with a synthetic standard of care (SOC). From a multicenter registry database of 474 patients with RRMM who received third- or more advanced-line treatments between January 2021 and October 2023, 1:1 propensity score-matched BiTE cohort (n = 71) and SOC cohort (n = 71) were established. Matching was based on age, sex, number of prior therapies, international staging system at diagnosis, and baseline biochemical characteristics. Compared with the matched SOC cohort, the matched BiTE cohort demonstrated a significant improvement in median progression-free survival (PFS, 19.2 vs 5.4 months, hazard ratio (HR) = .50 [95% CI, .33 to .78], p < .01). However, the overall survival (OS) was not significantly different between the two cohorts. Safety profiles showed that 37 (52%) patients in the matched BiTE cohort experienced cytokine release syndrome, mostly grade 1 (n = 29, 41%), with rare occurrences of neurotoxicity (n = 4, 5.6%). Infections were significantly more common in the matched BiTE cohort compared with the matched SOC cohort (81% vs. 49%, p < .01). Non-B-cell mutation antigen (BCMA)-targeted BiTEs improved 6-month OS rates compared with BCMA-targeted BiTEs in monotherapy (94% [95% CI, 84 to 100] vs. 65% [95% CI, 45 to 95], p = .04) and combination with daratumumab (100% [95% CI, 100 to 100] vs. 77% [95% CI, 57 to 100], p = .20). Non-BCMA-targeted BiTEs also provided benefit for 6-month PFS rate compared with the BCMA-targeted BiTE cohort in monotherapy (76% [95% CI, 59 to 100] vs. 50% [95% CI, 31 to 82], p = .11) and combination with daratumumab (100% [95% CI, 100 to 100] vs. 69% [95% CI, 48 to 99], p = .10). Quantitative bias and sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of these results. This real-world data-based study underscores the potential of BiTEs to significantly enhance survival outcomes in patients with heavily treated RRMM and manageable safety profiles. The difference in clinical outcomes by BiTE targets warrants further investigation in larger clinical trials (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT06205823).

A standing platform for cancer drug development using ctDNA-based evidence of recurrence

The time required to conduct clinical trials limits the rate at which we can evaluate and deliver new treatment options to patients with cancer. New approaches to increase trial efficiency while maintaining rigor would benefit patients, especially in oncology, in which adjuvant trials hold promise for intercepting metastatic disease, but typically require large numbers of patients and many years to complete. We envision a standing platform - an infrastructure to support ongoing identification and trial enrolment of patients with cancer with early molecular evidence of disease (MED) after curative-intent therapy for early-stage cancer, based on the presence of circulating tumour DNA. MED strongly predicts subsequent recurrence, with the vast majority of patients showing radiographic evidence of disease within 18 months. Such a platform would allow efficient testing of many treatments, from small exploratory studies to larger pivotal trials. Trials enrolling patients with MED but without radiographic evidence of disease have the potential to advance drug evaluation because they can be smaller (given high probability of recurrence) and faster (given short time to recurrence) than conventional adjuvant trials. Circulating tumour DNA may also provide a valuable early biomarker of treatment effect, which would allow small signal-finding trials. In this Perspective, we discuss how such a platform could be established.

A Framework for the Use and Likelihood of Regulatory Acceptance of Single-Arm Trials

BACKGROUND

Single-arm clinical trials (SAT) are common in drug and biologic submissions for rare or life-threatening conditions, especially when no therapeutic options exist. External control arms (ECAs) improve interpretation of SATs but pose methodological and regulatory challenges.

OBJECTIVE

Through narrative reviews and expert input, we developed a framework for considerations that might influence regulatory use and likelihood of regulatory acceptance of an SAT, identifying non-oncology first indication approvals as an area of interest. We systematically analyzed FDA and EMA approvals using SATs as pivotal evidence. The framework guided outcome abstraction on regulatory responses.

METHODS

We examined all non-oncology FDA and EMA drug and biologic approvals for first indications from 2019 to 2022 to identify those with SAT as pivotal safety or efficacy evidence. We abstracted outcomes, key study design features, regulator responses to SAT and (where applicable) ECA design, and product label content.

RESULTS

Among 20 SAT-based FDA approvals and 17 SAT-based EMA approvals, most common indications were progressive rare diseases with high unmet need/limited therapeutic options and a natural history without spontaneous improvement. Of the types of comparators, most were natural history cohorts (45% FDA; 47% EMA) and baseline controls (40% FDA; 47% EMA). Common critiques were of non-contemporaneous ECAs, subjective endpoints, and baseline covariate imbalance between arms.

CONCLUSION

Based on recent FDA and EMA approvals, the likelihood of regulatory success for SATs with ECAs depends on many design, analytic, and data quality considerations. Our framework is useful in early drug development when considering SAT strategies for evidence generation.

Do You Want to Stay Single? Considerations on Single-Arm Trials in Drug Development and the Postregulatory Space

Single-arm trials (SATs), while not preferred, remain in use throughout the drug development cycle. They may be accepted by regulators in particular contexts (e.g., in oncology or rare diseases) when the potential effects of new treatments are very large and placebo treatment is unethical. However, in the postregulatory space, SATs are common, and perhaps even more poorly suited to address the questions of interest. In this manuscript, we review regulatory and HTA positions on SATs; challenges posed by SATs to address research questions beyond regulators, evolving statistical methods to provide context for SATs, case studies where SATs could and could not address questions of interest, and communication strategies to influence decision making and optimize study design to address evidence needs.

Is Canada Moving towards a More Agile Regulatory Approval and Reimbursement Process with a Shifting Role for Real-World Evidence (RWE) for Oncology Drugs?

Canada is known to have a complex pathway for new drug approval and reimbursement, resulting in delayed access for patients with serious and life-threatening diseases, such as cancer. Several recent publications from key stakeholders, including patients, physicians and policymakers, highlight patient helplessness, physician frustrations and policymakers entangled in a massive network of bureaucracy unable to make headway. Several quantitative and qualitative assessments using time from regulatory approvals to successful reimbursements confirm long review times and high rejection rates for oncology drugs, especially those receiving conditional approvals. A consensus forum of 18 Canadian oncology clinicians recently voiced frustration with the process and inability to deliver guideline-supported efficacious therapies to their patients. This manuscript compares data extracted from publicly available data sources from 2019 to June 2024 to previous publications. Methods: Public databases from Health Canada, the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH), which is in the process of changing to Canada's Drug Agency, and the pan-Canadian Pharmaceutical Alliance (pCPA) were reviewed and the data collected were analyzed with descriptive statistics. Results: From the data, three trends emerge, (i) an increasing number of oncology drugs are receiving conditional approvals from Health Canada, (ii) the percentage of conditionally approved oncology drugs receiving positive reimbursement recommendations from CADTH is still low but appears to be improving, but delays in access are now contingent upon pCPA deciding whether to negotiate price and then the duration of any negotiation, and (iii) real-world evidence is no longer part of the decision-making for conditional approvals. A slight increase in the positive endorsement of RWE used to support CADTH recommendations was observed. Conclusions: The lack of timely access to oncology drugs hurts Canadian patients. While a small trend of improvement appears to be emerging, longer-term data collection is required to ensure sustained patient benefits.

Analytical Methods for Comparing Uncontrolled Trials With External Controls From Real-World Data: A Systematic Literature Review and Comparison With European Regulatory and Health Technology Assessment Practice

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to provide an overview of analytical methods in scientific literature for comparing uncontrolled medicine trials with external controls from individual patient data real-world data (IPD-RWD) and to compare these methods with recommendations made in guidelines from European regulatory and health technology assessment (HTA) organizations and with their evaluations described in assessment reports.

METHODS

A systematic literature review (until March 1, 2023) in PubMed and Connected Papers was performed to identify analytical methods for comparing uncontrolled trials with external controls from IPD-RWD. These methods were compared descriptively with methods recommended in method guidelines and encountered in assessment reports of the European Medicines Agency (2015-2020) and 4 European HTA organizations (2015-2023).

RESULTS

Thirty-four identified scientific articles described analytical methods for comparing uncontrolled trial data with IPD-RWD-based external controls. The various methods covered controlling for confounding and/or dependent censoring, correction for missing data, and analytical comparative modeling methods. Seven guidelines also focused on research design, RWD quality, and transparency aspects, and 4 of those recommended analytical methods for comparisons with IPD-RWD. The methods discussed in regulatory (n = 15) and HTA (n = 35) assessment reports were often based on aggregate data and lacked transparency owing to the few details provided.

CONCLUSIONS

Literature and guidelines suggest a methodological approach to comparing uncontrolled trials with external controls from IPD-RWD similar to target trial emulation, using state-of-the-art methods. External controls supporting regulatory and HTA decision making were rarely in line with this approach. Twelve recommendations are proposed to improve the quality and acceptability of these methods.

Real-world evidence to support regulatory submissions: A landscape review and assessment of use cases

Real-world evidence (RWE) has an increasing role in preapproval settings to support the approval of new medicines and indications. The main objectives of this study were to identify and characterize regulatory use cases that utilized RWE and other related observational approaches through targeted review of publications and regulatory review documents. After screening and inclusion/exclusion, the review characterized 85 regulatory applications with RWE. A total of 31 were in oncology and 54 were in non-oncology therapeutic areas. Most were for indications in adults only (N = 42, 49.4%), while 13 were in pediatrics only (15.3%), and 30 were in both (35.3%). In terms of regulatory context, 59 cases (69.4%) were for an original marketing application, 24 (28.2%) were for label expansion, and 2 (2.4%) were for label modification. Most also received special regulatory designations (e.g., orphan indication, breakthrough therapy, fast track, conditional, and accelerated approvals). There were 42 cases that utilized RWE to support single-arm trials. External data to support single-arm trials were utilized in various ways across use cases, including direct matching, benchmarking, natural history studies as well as literature or previous trials. A variety of data sources were utilized, including electronic health records, claims, registries, site-based charts. Endpoints in oncology use cases commonly included overall survival, progression-free survival. In 13 use cases, RWE was not considered supportive/definitive in regulatory decision-making due to design issues (e.g., small sample size, selection bias, missing data). Overall, RWE is utilized in regulatory approval processes for new indications/label expansion across various therapeutic areas with wide range of approaches. Multifaceted cross-sector efforts are needed to further improve the quality and utility of RWE in regulatory decision-making.

Examining external control arms in oncology: A scoping review of applications to date

OBJECTIVES

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the gold standard for evaluating the comparative efficacy and safety of new cancer therapies. However, enrolling patients in control arms of clinical trials can be challenging for rare cancers, particularly in the context of precision oncology and targeted therapies. External Control Arms (ECAs) are a potential solution to address these challenges in clinical research design. We conducted a scoping review to explore the use of ECAs in oncology.

METHODS

We systematically searched four databases, namely MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Scopus. We screened titles, abstracts, and full texts for eligible articles focusing on patients undergoing therapy for cancer, employing ECAs, and reporting clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

Of the 629 articles screened, 23 were included in this review. The earliest included studies were published in 1996, while most studies were published in the past 5 years. 44% (10/23) of ECAs were employed in blood-related cancer studies. Geographically, 30% (7/23) of studies were conducted in the United States, 22% (5/23) in Japan, and 9% (2/23) in South Korea. The primary data sources used to construct the ECAs involved pooled data from previous trials (35%, 8/23), administrative health databases (17%, 4/23) and electronic medical records (17%, 4/23). While 52% (12/23) of the studies employed methods to align treatment and ECAs characteristics, 48% (11/23) lacked explicit strategies.

CONCLUSION

ECAs offer a valuable approach in oncology research, particularly when alternative designs are not feasible. However, careful methodological planning and detailed reporting are essential for meaningful and reliable results.

Accrual and statistical power failure in published adjuvant phase III oncology trials: a comprehensive analysis from 2013 to 2023

BACKGROUND

In a competitive landscape with many ongoing adjuvant randomised controlled trials (RCTs), the prevalence of trials that failed to recruit their targeted sample size and were inadequately powered is unclear. The aims of the study are (i) to determine the percentage of trials with accrual and statistical power failure and (ii) to evaluate their potential impact on the drug development process.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic review was carried out to identify adjuvant phase III oncology RCTs reported between 2013 and 2023 across all solid tumours. No restrictions were applied regarding the type of intervention or journal of publication. The percentage of trials with accrual failure and power failure was estimated as well as their association with the efficacy endpoints. Logistic regression models were used to estimate the odds ratio (OR) and its 95% confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS

A total of 282 RCTs met the inclusion criteria with a median sample size of 661 patients and a median accrual period of 4.3 years. Most of these studies were superiority trials (83.0%). Accrual failure was observed in 22.0% of the studies, finishing recruitment without achieving the targeted sample size. Overall, 39.7% of the studies experienced power failure, having less power than specified in the protocol at the date of the read-out. Among superiority RCTs evaluating intermediate survival endpoints, only 31.1% presented statistically significant results. Trials with power failure were less likely to present statistically significant results (37.9% versus 21.9%, P = 0.04). The association was consistent across all cancer types. In the subset of non-inferiority trials, 35.0% formally demonstrated non-inferiority of the experimental arm.

CONCLUSIONS

Nearly 40% of adjuvant phase III RCTs experienced power failure, and the reduction in power significantly impacted the final study results. There is a need for procedural refinements in the design and implementation of future adjuvant RCTs to mitigate these fallacies.

How to develop new systemic treatments in ultra-rare cancers with high unmet needs? The case of alveolar soft-part sarcoma

Developing new drugs or generating evidence for existing drugs in new indications for ultra-rare cancers is complex and carries a high-risk of failure. This gets even harder in ultra-rare tumours, which have an annual incidence of 1 per 1,000,000 population or less. Here, we illustrate the problem of adequate evidence generation in ultra-rare tumours, using Alveolar Soft-Part Sarcomas (ASPS) - an ultra-rare sarcoma newly diagnosed in approximately 60 persons a year in the European Union - as an exemplar case showing challenges in development despite being potentially relevant for classes of agents. We discuss some possible approaches for addressing such challenges, especially focussing on constructive collaboration between academic groups, patients and advocates, drug manufacturers, and regulators to optimise drug development in ultra-rare cancers. This article, written by various European stakeholders, proposes a way forward to ultimately get better options for patients with ultra-rare cancers.

The Next Horizon of Drug Development: External Control Arms and Innovative Tools to Enrich Clinical Trial Data

Conducting clinical trials (CTs) has become increasingly costly and complex in terms of designing and operationalizing. These challenges exist in running CTs on novel therapies, particularly in oncology and rare diseases, where CTs increasingly target narrower patient groups. In this study, we describe external control arms (ECA) and other relevant tools, such as virtualization and decentralized clinical trials (DCTs), and the ability to follow the clinical trial subjects in the real world using tokenization. ECAs are typically constructed by identifying appropriate external sources of data, then by cleaning and standardizing it to create an analysis-ready data file, and finally, by matching subjects in the external data with the subjects in the CT of interest. In addition, ECA tools also include subject-level meta-analysis and simulated subjects' data for analyses. By implementing the recent advances in digital health technologies and devices, virtualization, and DCTs, realigning of CTs from site-centric designs to virtual, decentralized, and patient-centric designs can be done, which reduces the patient burden to participate in the CTs and encourages diversity. Tokenization technology allows linking the CT data with real-world data (RWD), creating more comprehensive and longitudinal outcome measures. These tools provide robust ways to enrich the CT data for informed decision-making, reduce the burden on subjects and costs of trial operations, and augment the insights gained for the CT data.

The wedish initiative for the stdy of ary sclerosing cholangitis (SUPRIM)

Background

Despite more than 50 years of research and parallel improvements in hepatology and oncology, there is still today neither a treatment to prevent disease progression in primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC), nor reliable early diagnostic tools for the associated hepatobiliary cancers. Importantly, the limited understanding of the underlying biological mechanisms in PSC and its natural history not only affects the identification of new drug targets but implies a lack of surrogate markers that hampers the design of clinical trials and the evaluation of drug efficacy. The lack of easy access to large representative well-characterised prospective resources is an important contributing factor to the current situation.

Methods

We here present the SUPRIM cohort, a national multicentre prospective longitudinal study of unselected PSC patients capturing the representative diversity of PSC phenotypes. We describe the 10-year effort of inclusion and follow-up, an intermediate analysis report including original results, and the associated research resource. All included patients gave written informed consent (recruitment: November 2011-April 2016).

Findings

Out of 512 included patients, 452 patients completed the five-year follow-up without endpoint outcomes. Liver transplantation was performed in 54 patients (10%) and hepatobiliary malignancy was diagnosed in 15 patients (3%). We draw a comprehensive landscape of the multidimensional clinical and biological heterogeneity of PSC illustrating the diversity of PSC phenotypes. Performances of available predictive scores are compared and perspectives on the continuation of the SUPRIM cohort are provided.

Interpretation

We envision the SUPRIM cohort as an open-access collaborative resource to accelerate the generation of new knowledge and independent validations of promising ones with the aim to uncover reliable diagnostics, prognostic tools, surrogate markers, and new treatment targets by 2040.

Funding

This work was supported by the Swedish Cancer Society, Stockholm County Council, and the Cancer Research Funds of Radiumhemmet.

Considerations for master protocols using external controls

There has been an increasing use of master protocols in oncology clinical trials because of its efficiency to accelerate cancer drug development and flexibility to accommodate multiple substudies. Depending on the study objective and design, a master protocol trial can be a basket trial, an umbrella trial, a platform trial, or any other form of trials in which multiple investigational products and/or subpopulations are studied under a single protocol. Master protocols can use external data and evidence (e.g. external controls) for treatment effect estimation, which can further improve efficiency of master protocol trials. This paper provides an overview of different types of external controls and their unique features when used in master protocols. Some key considerations in master protocols with external controls are discussed including construction of estimands, assessment of fit-for-use real-world data, and considerations for different types of master protocols. Similarities and differences between regular randomized controlled trials and master protocols when using external controls are discussed. A targeted learning-based causal roadmap is presented which constitutes three key steps: (1) define a target statistical estimand that aligns with the causal estimand for the study objective, (2) use an efficient estimator to estimate the target statistical estimand and its uncertainty, and (3) evaluate the impact of causal assumptions on the study conclusion by performing sensitivity analyses. Two illustrative examples for master protocols using external controls are discussed for their merits and possible improvement in causal effect estimation.

Comparative efficacy and safety of Sofosbuvir/Velpatasvir and Danoprevir for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C: the real-world data in China

BACKGROUND

Sofosbuvir/Velpatasvir (Epclusa, ECS) is the first pan-genotype direct-acting antiviral agent (DAA) for hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection, and Danoprevir (DNV) is the first DAA developed by a Chinese local enterprise, which is suitable for combined use with other drugs to treat genotype 1b chronic hepatitis C. However, previous reports have never compared the real-world data of ECS and DNV.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

178 chronic hepatitis C patients were retrospectively recruited, and 94cases were accepted with Sofosbuvir/Velpatasvir ± Ribavirin (ECS group), and others (n = 84 treated with DNV combination therapy (DNV group). The HCV genotype, virological response, adverse effects and some laboratory biochemical indexes were contrasted between above two groups in the real world study.

RESULTS

DNV group had significantly lower level of alpha-fetoprotein (AFP), lower rates of decompensated cirrhosis ( P < 0.05). ECS group possessed more 6a (31.91% vs.13.10%) while DNV group was provided with more 1b (48.81% vs. 22.34%) patients. Significantly poor liver function was detected in ECS group at 4-week treatment (ALT and AST) and 12-week follow-up (AST) (all P < 0.05). The SVR12 undetectable rates of both groups were 100%, and no serious event was observed during the treatment and follow-up in both groups.

CONCLUSION

In this retrospective real-world study, the efficacy of DNV combined therapy is similar to Sofosbuvir/Velpatasvir ± Ribavirin for chronic HCV infection, and the safety is comparable. DNV based therapy is a promising regimen for chronic hepatitis C.

Justifying the source of external comparators in single-arm oncology health technology submissions: a review of NICE and PBAC assessments

Background: The drive to expedite patient access for diseases with high unmet treatment needs has come with an increasing use of single-arm trials (SATs), especially in oncology. However, the lack of control arms in such trials creates challenges to assess and demonstrate comparative efficacy. External control (EC) arms can be used to bridge this gap, with various types of sources available to obtain relevant data. Objective: To examine the source of ECs in single-arm oncology health technology assessment (HTA) submissions to the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) and the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee (PBAC) and how this selection was justified by manufacturers and assessed by the respective HTA body. Methods: Single-arm oncology HTA submission reports published by NICE (England) and PBAC (Australia) from January 2011 to August 2021 were reviewed, with data qualitatively synthesized to identify themes. Results: Forty-eight oncology submissions using EC arms between 2011 and 2021 were identified, with most submissions encompassing blood and bone marrow cancers (52%). In HTA submissions to NICE and PBAC, the EC arm was typically constructed from a combination of data sources, with the company's justification in data source selection infrequently provided (PBAC [2 out of 19]; NICE [6 out of 29]), although this lack of justification was not heavily criticized by either HTA body. Conclusion: Although HTA bodies such as NICE and PBAC encourage that EC source justification should be provided in submissions, this review found that this is not typically implemented in practice. Guidance is needed to establish best practices as to how EC selection should be documented in HTA submissions.

Matching by OS Prognostic Score to Construct External Controls in Lung Cancer Clinical Trials

External controls (eControls) leverage historical data to create non-randomized control arms. The lack of randomization can result in confounding between the experimental and eControl cohorts. To balance potentially confounding variables between the cohorts, one of the proposed methods is to match on prognostic scores. Still, the performance of prognostic scores to construct eControls in oncology has not been analyzed yet. Using an electronic health record-derived de-identified database, we constructed eControls using one of three methods: ROPRO, a state-of-the-art prognostic score, or either a propensity score composed of five (5Vars) or 27 covariates (ROPROvars). We compared the performance of these methods in estimating the overall survival (OS) hazard ratio (HR) of 11 recent advanced non-small cell lung cancer. The ROPRO eControls had a lower OS HR error (median absolute deviation (MAD), 0.072, confidence interval (CI): 0.036-0.185), than the 5Vars (MAD 0.081, CI: 0.025-0.283) and ROPROvars eControls (MAD 0.087, CI: 0.054-0.383). Notably, the OS HR errors for all methods were even lower in the phase III studies. Moreover, the ROPRO eControl cohorts included, on average, more patients than the 5Vars (6.54%) and ROPROvars cohorts (11.7%). The eControls matched with the prognostic score reproduced the controls more reliably than propensity scores composed of the underlying variables. Additionally, prognostic scores could allow eControls to be built on many prognostic variables without a significant increase in the variability of the propensity score, which would decrease the number of matched patients.

Framework for the Use of External Controls to Evaluate Treatment Outcomes in Precision Oncology Trials

Advances in genomics have enabled anticancer therapies to be tailored to target specific genomic alterations. Single-arm trials (SATs), including those incorporated within umbrella, basket, and platform trials, are widely adopted when it is not feasible to conduct randomized controlled trials in rare biomarker-defined subpopulations. External controls (ECs), defined as control arm data derived outside the clinical trial, have gained renewed interest as a strategy to supplement evidence generated from SATs to allow comparative analysis. There are increasing examples demonstrating the application of EC in precision oncology trials. The prospective application of EC in conducting comparative studies is associated with distinct methodological challenges, the specific considerations for EC use in biomarker-defined subpopulations have not been adequately discussed, and a formal framework is yet to be established. In this review, we present a framework for conducting a prospective comparative analysis using EC. Key steps are (1) defining the purpose of using EC to address the study question, (2) determining if the external data are fit for purpose, (3) developing a transparent study protocol and a statistical analysis plan, and (iv) interpreting results and drawing conclusions on the basis of a prespecified hypothesis. We specify the considerations required for the biomarker-defined subpopulations, which include (1) specifying the comparator and biomarker status of the comparator group, (2) defining lines of treatment, (3) assessment of the biomarker testing panels used, and (4) assessment of cohort stratification in tumor-agnostic studies. We further discuss novel clinical trial designs and statistical techniques leveraging EC to propose future directions to advance evidence generation and facilitate drug development in precision oncology.

Reassessing the efficacy of bevacizumab in newly diagnosed glioblastoma: A systematic review and external pseudodata-based analysis

Background

First-line use of bevacizumab for glioblastoma (GBM) was evaluated in 2 phase 3 randomized controlled trials (RCT), demonstrating an impact on progression-free survival but not overall survival (OS). However, the crossover events of these trials raised concerns regarding the reliability of this latter analysis. In this study, we conducted an external control-based reassessment of the bevacizumab efficacy in newly diagnosed GBM (ndGBM) against the standard Stupp protocol.

Methods

A systematic review of the literature was conducted to identify the phase 3 RCTs in ndGBM incorporating the Stupp protocol as an arm. For the selected studies, we extracted individual patient survival pseudodata of the Stupp protocol arm by digitizing the Kaplan-Meier plots. A comprehensive pipeline was established to select suitable control studies as external benchmarks.

Results

Among the 13 identified studies identified in our systematic review, 4 studies resulted as comparable with the AVAglio trial and 2 with the RTOG 0825. Pooled individual patient pseudodata analysis showed no differences in terms of OS when bevacizumab was added to the Stupp protocol.

Conclusions

The external-controlled-based reassessment of the bevacizumab treatment in ndGBM confirmed its lack of efficacy in extending OS. Our study includes a summary table of individual patient survival pseudodata from all phase 3 RCTs in ndGBM employing the Stupp protocol and provides a pipeline that offers comprehensive guidance for conducting external control-based assessments in ndGBM.

Longitudinal Natural History Study of Children and Adults with Rare Solid Tumors: Initial Results for First 200 Participants

Understanding of tumor biology and identification of effective therapies is lacking for many rare tumors. My Pediatric and Adult Rare Tumor (MyPART) network was established to engage patients, advocates, and researchers and conduct a comprehensive longitudinal Natural History Study of Rare Solid Tumors. Through remote or in-person enrollment at the NIH Clinical Center, participants with rare solid tumors ≥4 weeks old complete standardized medical and family history forms, patient reported outcomes, and provide tumor, blood and/or saliva samples. Medical records are extracted for clinical status and treatment history, and tumors undergo genomic analysis. A total of 200 participants (65% female, 35% male, median age at diagnosis 43 years, range = 2-77) enrolled from 46 U.S. states and nine other countries (46% remote, 55% in-person). Frequent diagnoses were neuroendocrine neoplasms (NEN), adrenocortical carcinomas (ACC), medullary thyroid carcinomas (MTC), succinate dehydrogenase (SDH)-deficient gastrointestinal stromal tumors (sdGIST), and chordomas. At enrollment, median years since diagnosis was 3.5 (range = 0-36.6), 63% participants had metastatic disease and 20% had no evidence of disease. Pathogenic germline and tumor mutations included SDHA/B/C (sdGIST), RET (MTC), TP53 and CTNNB1 (ACC), MEN1 (NEN), and SMARCB1 (poorly-differentiated chordoma). Clinically significant anxiety was observed in 20%-35% of adults. Enrollment of participants and comprehensive data collection were feasible. Remote enrollment was critical during the COVID-19 pandemic. Over 30 patients were enrolled with ACC, NEN, and sdGIST, allowing for clinical/genomic analyses across tumors. Longitudinal follow-up and expansion of cohorts are ongoing to advance understanding of disease course and establish external controls for interventional trials.

SIGNIFICANCE

This study demonstrates that comprehensive, tumor-agnostic data and biospecimen collection is feasible to characterize different rare tumors, and speed progress in research. The findings will be foundational to developing external controls groups for single-arm interventional trials, where randomized control trials cannot be conducted because of small patient populations.

Initial investigation of using Norwegian health data for the purpose of external comparator arms - an example for non-small cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND

Using real-world (RW) data from registries to mimic or substitute a comparator arm of clinical trials is increasingly investigated. The feasibility of using data sources for this purpose depends on the source's completeness of the wide spectrum of a disease characteristics and relevant endpoints, which could allow for proper matching of important variables.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a Norwegian study using data from three population-based registries, the Cancer Registry (CRN), the National Patient Registry (NPR), and the Norwegian Prescribed Drug Registry (LMR). We assessed if the registries contained the information necessary for selecting a RW cohort of patients with characteristics that mimicked the inclusion and exclusion criteria from the control arm of the phase 3 trial (KeyNote-407) on patients with stage IV, squamous NSCLC. We did this both on an aggregated - and individual data level. We also described the survival in the RW-cohorts and compared it with the survival in the control arm of the KN-407 trial.

RESULTS

Using aggregated data from the CRN allowed us to find the patients based on some clinically relevant inclusion criteria, but only to a limited extent could we apply the exclusion criteria of KN-407. When we used individual data from the CRN, NPR and the LMR we could create a patient cohort that shared more criteria corresponding to the eligibility criteria from KN-407, including exclusion criteria. Compared to the 11.3 months (CI 95% 9.5, 14.8) median survival in the control arm of KN-407, both RW-cohorts had a shorter median survival, 7.07 months (CI 95% 6.7, 9.5) (individual) and 8.0 months (CI 95% 5.8, 10.5) (aggregated).

CONCLUSION

Even if we demonstrated that the registries contain clinically relevant information necessary to mimic the eligibility criteria of a selected RCT, the survival is shorter for RW patients compared to their control arm counterpart in the RCT.

Clinical trial considerations for pediatric cancer drug development

Oncology has been one of the most active therapeutic areas in medicinal products development. Despite this fact, few drugs have been approved for use in pediatric cancer patients when compared to the number approved for adults with cancer. This disparity could be attributed to the fact that many oncology drugs have had orphan drug designation and were exempt from Pediatric Research Equity Act (PREA) requirements. On August 18, 2017, the RACE for Children Act, i.e. Research to Accelerate Cures and Equity Act, was signed into law as Title V of the 2017 FDA Reauthorization Act (FDARA) to amend the PREA. Pediatric investigation is now required if the drug or biological product is intended for the treatment of an adult cancer and directed at a molecular target that FDA determines to be "substantially relevant to the growth or progression of a pediatric cancer." This paper discusses the specific considerations in clinical trial designs and statistical methodologies to be implemented in oncology pediatric clinical programs.

SURF: A Screening Tool (for Sponsors) to Evaluate Whether Using Real-World Data to Support an Effectiveness Claim in an FDA Application Has Regulatory Feasibility

Based on recent guidance and publicly available approvals, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has demonstrated its openness to considering evidence of effectiveness from real-world data (RWD) and nonrandomized studies (or "real-world evidence (RWE)") in its decision making. Through analysis of the FDA approvals, several authors have identified methodologic issues commonly discussed by FDA reviewers. However, in our analysis of FDA guidance and use cases, acceptability of RWE also critically depends on whether the characteristics of the clinical development program align with circumstances in which the FDA may have flexibility in considering evidence from real-world study designs relative to more robust designs. Successful use of RWD requires advance planning to allocate the necessary resources and time to undertake principled epidemiology approaches to study design, data selection, and implementation of analyses as well as address regulatory feedback. Thus, sponsors benefit from early identification of programs in which successful RWD use is more likely, to ensure efficient use of resources required for the next steps of scientific feasibility assessment. We developed SURF, a screening tool intended to help a sponsor decide whether to prioritize resources for further exploring the feasibility of using an RWD approach to meet the FDA's effectiveness evidentiary standards for a particular clinical development program. Here, we provide an analysis of FDA guidance, highlighting the circumstances in which RWD approaches may be most acceptable, and demonstrate the use of this screening tool, including the rationale for its construction, types of evidence needed, and application to publicly available approvals as support of concept.

Factors Associated with Survival in Anaplastic Thyroid Carcinoma: A Multicenter Study from the ENDOCAN-TUTHYREF Network

Background: Anaplastic thyroid carcinoma (ATC) is a rare and frequently fatal type of thyroid cancer. The degree of heterogeneity in survival rates for ATC is incompletely studied. This study evaluated the factors associated with overall survival (OS) of patients with ATC using multicenter real-world data from a national tertiary care center network in France. Methods: In this multicenter, retrospective cohort study, all patients with ATC diagnosed between 2010 and 2020 were identified from the national database of the French ENDOCAN-TUTHYREF network. Factors associated with OS were examined in multivariable analyses using Cox proportional hazards models. Results: The study included 360 patients. Of these, 220 (61%) were female and the median age was 72 years (interquartile range: 62-80). The percentages of patients with pure and mixed (synchronously-transformed) ATC (p-ATC and st-ATC) were 62.5% and 26.7%, respectively. The median OS was 6.8 months [confidence interval, CI: 5.5-8.1]: not reached for stage IVa, 11.4 months [8.2-17.8] for IVb, and 4.6 months [3.5-5.7] for IVc. Surgery, radiation therapy to the neck, chemotherapy, and best supportive care were administered to 69 (19.2%), 214 (59.4%), 254 (70.6%), and 66 (18.3%) patients, respectively. In a multivariable analysis, including stage IVb-IVc patients, significantly higher OS was observed in patients with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance-status of 0-1 (hazard ratio [HR], 0.6; [CI, 0.4-0.9], p < 0.02), stage IVb [HR, 0.5; CI, 0.4-0.8, p < 0.001], and multimodal treatment (surgery and chemoradiotherapy) [HR, 0.07; CI, 0.04-0.1, p < 0.001]. Variables associated with significantly worse OS included: p-ATC (vs. st-ATC) [HR, 1.83; CI, 1.33-2.51, p = 0.001] and a neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) >5.05 [HR, 2.05, CI, 1.39-3.05, p < 0.001]. Conclusions: Factors independently associated with improved OS in ATC included: European Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, disease stage, multimodality treatment, synchronously transformed ATC, and lower NLR. Long-term OS was observed in selected patients with ATC who underwent multimodal treatment.

Nonrandomised controlled trial in recurrent glioblastoma patients: the promise of autologous tumour lysate-loaded dendritic cell vaccination

Recently, Liau et al. reported the results of Phase 3 clinical trial testing DCVax-L vaccines on patients with glioblastoma. Despite the promising and significant results obtained, the study design and the long-lasting period of recruitment of this work deserve some reflection.

Comparative effectiveness study of paliperidone palmitate 6-month with a real-world external comparator arm of paliperidone palmitate 1-month or 3-month in patients with schizophrenia

Background

The paliperidone palmitate 6-month (PP6M) long-acting injectable formulation is currently the longest dosing interval available for schizophrenia treatment.

Objective

To compare treatment outcomes between a real-world external comparator arm (ECA; NeuroBlu database) and the PP6M open-label extension (OLE) clinical trial arm.

Methods

The ECA comprised patients receiving PP 1-month (PP1M) or PP 3-month (PP3M) for ⩾12 months without a relapse. The PP6M OLE arm included patients with PP1M treatment prior to randomization who completed the 12-month double-blind PP6M study on either PP3M or PP6M relapse-free. Inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to study time-to-relapse (primary outcome) and change in Clinical Global Impressions-Severity (CGI-S) score (secondary outcome).

Results

At 24 months, 3.9% (7/178) of patients in the PP6M cohort experienced a relapse versus 15.6% (26/167) in the ECA. Time-to-relapse was longer in the PP6M cohort versus the ECA at 12-, 18-, and 24-months across the different weighting methods; median time-to-relapse was not reached in both cohorts. Hazard ratio (HR) for relapse was significantly lower for the PP6M cohort versus the ECA throughout the duration of the study [HR at 24 months: 0.18 (95% CI: 0.08-0.42), p < 0.001]. At 24 months, change in CGI-S score for the PP6M cohort was 0.76 points lower than the ECA (p < 0.001). Results were similar in a sensitivity analysis using propensity score matching (PSM); IPTW resulted in larger sample sizes in balanced dataset than PSM.

Conclusion

Consistent findings across weighting and matching methods suggest PP6M efficacy in reducing and delaying relapses and long-term symptom control compared to PP1M/PP3M in usual-care settings. Additional confounds, such as greater illness severity and more frequent comorbidities and comedications in the ECA, were not fully controlled by the applied statistical methods. Future real-world studies directly comparing PP6M with PP3M/PP1M and adjusting for these confounders are warranted.

Adjuvant immunotherapy with nivolumab versus observation in completely resected Merkel cell carcinoma (ADMEC-O): disease-free survival results from a randomised, open-label, phase 2 trial

BACKGROUND

Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC) is an immunogenic but aggressive skin cancer. Even after complete resection and radiation, relapse rates are high. PD-1 and PD-L1 checkpoint inhibitors showed clinical benefit in advanced MCC. We aimed to assess efficacy and safety of adjuvant immune checkpoint inhibition in completely resected MCC (ie, a setting without an established systemic standard-of-care treatment).

METHODS

In this multicentre phase 2 trial, patients (any stage, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-1) at 20 academic medical centres in Germany and the Netherlands with completely resected MCC lesions were randomly assigned 2:1 to receive nivolumab 480 mg every 4 weeks for 1 year, or observation, stratified by stage (American Joint Committee on Cancer stages 1-2 vs stages 3-4), age (<65 vs ≥65 years), and sex. Landmark disease-free survival (DFS) at 12 and 24 months was the primary endpoint, assessed in the intention-to-treat populations. Overall survival and safety were secondary endpoints. This planned interim analysis was triggered when the last-patient-in was followed up for more than 1 year. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02196961) and with the EU Clinical Trials Register (2013-000043-78).

FINDINGS

Between Oct 1, 2014, and Aug 31, 2020, 179 patients were enrolled (116 [65%] stage 3-4, 122 [68%] ≥65 years, 111 [62%] male). Stratification factors (stage, age, sex) were balanced across the nivolumab (n=118) and internal control group (observation, n=61); adjuvant radiotherapy was more common in the control group. At a median follow-up of 24·3 months (IQR 19·2-33·4), median DFS was not reached (between-groups hazard ratio 0·58, 95% CI 0·30-1·12); DFS rates in the nivolumab group were 85% at 12 months and 84% at 24 months, and in the observation group were 77% at 12 months and 73% at 24 months. Overall survival results were not yet mature. Grade 3-4 adverse events occurred in 48 [42%] of 115 patients who received at least one dose of nivolumab and seven [11%] of 61 patients in the observation group. No treatment-related deaths were reported.

INTERPRETATION

Adjuvant therapy with nivolumab resulted in an absolute risk reduction of 9% (1-year DFS) and 10% (2-year DFS). The present interim analysis of ADMEC-O might suggest clinical use of nivolumab in this area of unmet medical need. However, overall survival events rates, with ten events in the active treatment group and six events in the half-the-size observation group, are not mature enough to draw conclusions. The explorative data of our trial support the continuation of ongoing, randomised trials in this area. ADMEC-O suggests that adjuvant immunotherapy is clinically feasible in this area of unmet medical need.

FUNDING

Bristol Myers Squibb.

Targeted Approaches to Treatment of Pleural Mesothelioma: A Review

Pleural mesothelioma is an aggressive disease that is enriched for inactivating alterations in tumor suppressor genes. Systemic therapeutic strategies for pleural mesothelioma generally involve chemotherapies and immunotherapies that are chosen without consideration of the tumor's molecular profile. As this generalized approach to treatment rarely yields durable responses, alternative therapeutic regimens are urgently indicated. Preclinical studies have identified synthetic lethal protein and metabolic interactions, recurrently overexpressed proteins, and frequent pathway perturbations that may be therapeutically exploited in mesothelioma. This review discusses the mechanism of action of emerging investigational therapies and summarizes findings from phase I-II clinical trials exploring selective, biomarker-driven therapeutic strategies for mesothelioma, with a focus on five common targets. Finally, using lessons learned from these clinical trials, imperatives for successful implementation of targeted therapy in mesothelioma are discussed.

Designs used in published therapeutic studies of rare superficial vascular anomalies: a systematic literature search

BACKGROUND

Rare superficial vascular anomalies represent a wide range of diseases. Their management is difficult given the broad spectrum and the lack of clinical trials assessing treatment efficacy. A randomized clinical trial of vascular anomalies is difficult because of the rarity of the diseases and is enhanced by the population of interest often being children. Therefore, suitable designs are needed. We conducted a methodological systematic literature search to identify designs implemented for investigating the treatment of rare superficial vascular anomalies.

METHODS

We conducted a literature search on January 25, 2021, of the PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov and European Union Clinical Trials Register databases. This systematic methodological literature search was registered at the Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO: CRD42021232449). Randomized and non-randomized studies were included if they met the following criteria: were prospective studies of rare superficial vascular anomaly therapies, dealt with humans (adults and children) and were published in English from 2000. We excluded case reports/case series reporting fewer than 10 patients, reviews, retrospective studies, animal studies, studies of systemic or common vascular anomalies and non-therapeutic studies. We did not assess risk of bias in the included studies because our review was a methodological one focused on the design used. The review provided a descriptive analysis of relevant features of eligible research studies.

RESULTS

From 2046 articles identified, we included 97 studies (62 reports and 35 ongoing studies): 25 randomized controlled studies, 7 non-randomized comparative studies, 64 prospective cohorts and 1 case series. Among the 32 comparative studies included, 21 used a parallel-group design. The 11 other studies used different designs such as cross-over, randomized placebo phase, delayed-start, within-person, or challenge-dechallenge-rechallenge or used a historical control group or an observational run-in period.

CONCLUSIONS

Our systematic literature search highlights the lack of randomized control trials in superficial vascular anomalies due to the rarity of patients and their heterogeneity. New designs are emerging and can overcome the limitations of testing treatments in parallel groups.

Clinical development of new drugs for adults and children with cancer, 2010-2020

BACKGROUND

Many new molecular entities enter clinical development to evaluate potential therapeutic benefits for oncology patients. We characterized adult and pediatric development of the set of new molecular entities that started clinical testing in 2010-2015 worldwide.

METHODS

We extracted data from AdisInsight, an extensive database of global pharmaceutical development, and the FDA.gov website. We followed the cohort of new molecular entities initiating first-in-human phase I clinical trials in 2010-2015 to the end of 2020. For each new molecular entity, we determined whether it was granted US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval, studied in a trial open to pediatric enrollment, or stalled during development. We characterized the cumulative incidence of these endpoints using statistical methods for censored data.

RESULTS

The 572 new molecular entities starting first-in-human studies in 2010-2015 were studied in 6142 trials by the end of 2020. Most new molecular entities were small molecules (n = 316, 55.2%), antibodies (n = 148, 25.9%), or antibody-drug conjugates (n = 44, 7.7%). After a mean follow-up of 8.0 years, 173 new molecular entities did not advance beyond first-in-human trials, and 39 were approved by the FDA. New molecular entities had a 10.4% estimated probability (95% confidence interval = 6.6% to 14.1%) of being approved by the FDA within 10 years of first-in-human trials. After a median of 4.6 years since start of first-in-human trials, 67 (11.7%) new molecular entities were tested in trials open to pediatric patients, and 5 (0.9%) were approved for pediatric indications.

CONCLUSIONS

More efficient clinical development strategies are needed to evaluate new cancer therapies, especially for children, and incorporate approaches to ensure knowledge gain from investigational products that stall in development.

Effectively Leveraging RWD for External Controls: A Systematic Literature Review of Regulatory and HTA Decisions

Real-world data (RWD)-derived external controls can be used to contextualize efficacy findings for investigational therapies evaluated in uncontrolled trials. As the number of submissions to regulatory and health technology assessment (HTA) bodies using external controls rises, and in light of recent regulatory and HTA guidance on the appropriate use of RWD, there is a need to address the operational and methodological challenges impeding the quality of real-world evidence (RWE) generation and the consistency in evaluation of RWE across agencies. This systematic review summarizes publicly available information on the use of external controls to contextualize outcomes from uncontrolled trials for all indications from January 1, 2015, through August 20, 2021, that were submitted to the European Medicines Agency, the US Food and Drug Administration, and/or select major HTA bodies (National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), Haute Autorité de Santé (HAS), Institut für Qualität und Wirtschaftlichkeit im Gesundheitswesen (IQWiG), and Gemeinsamer Bundesausschuss (G-BA)). By systematically reviewing submissions to regulatory and HTA bodies in the context of recent guidance, this study provides quantitative and qualitative insights into how external control design and analytic choices may be viewed by different agencies in practice. The primary operational and methodological aspects identified for discussion include, but are not limited to, engagement of regulators and HTA bodies, approaches to handling missing data (a component of data quality), and selection of real-world endpoints. Continued collaboration and guidance to address these and other aspects will inform and assist stakeholders attempting to generate evidence using external controls.

External control arms: COVID-19 reveals the merits of using real world evidence in real-time for clinical and public health investigations

Randomized controlled trials are considered the 'gold standard' to reduce bias by randomizing patients to an experimental intervention, versus placebo or standard of care cohort. There are inherent challenges to enrolling a standard of care or cohorts: costs, site engagement logistics, socioeconomic variability, patient willingness, ethics of placebo interventions, cannibalizing the treatment arm population, and extending study duration. The COVID-19 pandemic has magnified aspects of constraints in trial recruitment and logistics, spurring innovative approaches to reducing trial sizes, accelerating trial accrual while preserving statistical rigor. Using data from medical records and databases allows for construction of external control arms that reduce the costs of an external control arm (ECA) randomized to standard of care. Simultaneously examining covariates of the clinical outcomes in ECAs that are being measured in the interventional arm can be particularly useful in phase 2 trials to better understand social and genetic determinants of clinical outcomes that might inform pivotal trial design. The FDA and EMA have promulgated a number of publicly available guidance documents and qualification reports that inform the use of this regulatory science tool to streamline clinical development, of phase 4 surveillance, and policy aspects of clinical outcomes research. Availability and quality of real-world data (RWD) are a prevalent impediment to the use of ECAs given such data is not collected with the rigor and deliberateness that characterizes prospective interventional control arm data. Conversely, in the case of contemporary control arms, a clinical trial outcome can be compared to a contemporary standard of care in cases where the standard of care is evolving at a fast pace, such as the use of checkpoint inhibitors in cancer care. Innovative statistical methods are an essential aspect of an ECA strategy and regulatory paths for these innovative approaches have been navigated, qualified, and in some cases published.

Effectiveness of tisagenlecleucel versus real-world standard of care in relapsed/refractory follicular lymphoma

Aim: To contextualize the effectiveness of tisagenlecleucel versus real-world standard of care (SoC) in relapsed/refractory follicular lymphoma. Materials & methods: A retrospective indirect matched comparison study using data from the phase II ELARA trial and the US Flatiron Health Research Database. Results: Complete response rate was 69.1 versus 17.7% and the overall response rate was 85.6 versus 58.1% in tisagenlecleucel versus SoC, post weighting by odds. For overall survival, an estimated reduction in the risk of death was observed in favor of tisagenlecleucel over SoC. The hazard ratio for progression-free survival was 0.45 (95% CI: 0.26, 0.88), and for time-to-next treatment was 0.34 (95% CI: 0.15, 0.78) with tisagenlecleucel versus SoC. Conclusion: A consistent trend toward improved efficacy end points was observed in favor of tisagenlecleucel versus SoC.

DCVax-L Vaccination in Patients with Glioblastoma: Real Promise or Negative Trial? The Debate Is Open

The lack of significant improvement in the prognosis of patients with GB over the last decades highlights the need for innovative treatments aimed at fighting this malignancy and increasing survival outcomes. The results of the phase III clinical trial of DCVax-L (autologous tumor lysate-loaded dendritic cell vaccination), which has been shown to increase both median survival and long-term survival in newly diagnosed and relapsed glioblastoma, have been enthusiastically received by the scientific community. However, this study deserves some reflections regarding methodological issues related to the primary endpoint change, the long accrual period, and the suboptimal validity of the external control population used as the comparison arm.

Accessible Data Collections for Improved Decision Making in Neuro-Oncology Clinical Trials

Drug development can be associated with slow timelines, particularly for rare or difficult-to-treat solid tumors such as glioblastoma. The use of external data in the design and analysis of trials has attracted significant interest because it has the potential to improve the efficiency and precision of drug development. A recurring challenge in the use of external data for clinical trials, however, is the difficulty in accessing high-quality patient-level data. Academic research groups generally do not have access to suitable datasets to effectively leverage external data for planning and analyses of new clinical trials. Given the need for resources to enable investigators to benefit from existing data assets, we have developed the Glioblastoma External (GBM-X) Data Platform which will allow investigators in neuro-oncology to leverage our data collection and obtain analyses. GBM-X strives to provide an uncomplicated process to use external data, contextualize single-arm trials, and improve inference on treatment effects early in drug development. The platform is designed to welcome interested collaborators and integrate new data into the platform, with the expectation that the data collection can continue to grow and remain updated. With such features, GBM-X is designed to help to accelerate evaluation of therapies, to grow with collaborations, and to serve as a model to improve drug discovery for rare and difficult-to-treat tumors in oncology.

Assessment of treatment response to dendritic cell vaccine in patients with glioblastoma using a multiparametric MRI-based prediction model

PURPOSE

Autologous tumor lysate-loaded dendritic cell vaccine (DCVax-L) is a promising treatment modality for glioblastomas. The purpose of this study was to investigate the potential utility of multiparametric MRI-based prediction model in evaluating treatment response in glioblastoma patients treated with DCVax-L.

METHODS

Seventeen glioblastoma patients treated with standard-of-care therapy + DCVax-L were included. When tumor progression (TP) was suspected and repeat surgery was being contemplated, we sought to ascertain the number of cases correctly classified as TP + mixed response or pseudoprogression (PsP) from multiparametric MRI-based prediction model using histopathology/mRANO criteria as ground truth. Multiparametric MRI model consisted of predictive probabilities (PP) of tumor progression computed from diffusion and perfusion MRI-derived parameters. A comparison of overall survival (OS) was performed between patients treated with standard-of-care therapy + DCVax-L and standard-of-care therapy alone (external controls). Additionally, Kaplan-Meier analyses were performed to compare OS between two groups of patients using PsP, Ki-67, and MGMT promoter methylation status as stratification variables.

RESULTS

Multiparametric MRI model correctly predicted TP + mixed response in 72.7% of cases (8/11) and PsP in 83.3% (5/6) with an overall concordance rate of 76.5% with final diagnosis as determined by histopathology/mRANO criteria. There was a significant concordant correlation coefficient between PP values and histopathology/mRANO criteria (r = 0.54; p = 0.026). DCVax-L-treated patients had significantly prolonged OS than those treated with standard-of-care therapy (22.38 ± 12.8 vs. 13.8 ± 9.5 months, p = 0.040). Additionally, glioblastomas with PsP, MGMT promoter methylation status, and Ki-67 values below median had longer OS than their counterparts.

CONCLUSION

Multiparametric MRI-based prediction model can assess treatment response to DCVax-L in patients with glioblastoma.

Confounding adjustment in the analysis of augmented randomized controlled trial with hybrid control arm

The augmented randomized controlled trial (RCT) with hybrid control arm includes a randomized treatment group (RT), a smaller randomized control group (RC), and a large synthetic control (SC) group from real-world data. This kind of trial is useful when there is logistics and ethics hurdle to conduct a fully powered RCT with equal allocation, or when it is necessary to increase the power of the RCT by incorporating real-world data. A difficulty in the analysis of augmented RCT is that the SC and RC may be systematically different in the distribution of observed and unmeasured confounding factors, causing bias when the two control groups are analyzed together as hybrid controls. We propose to use propensity score (PS) analysis to balance the observed confounders between SC and RC. The possible bias caused by unmeasured confounders can be estimated and tested by analyzing propensity score adjusted outcomes from SC and RC. We also propose a partial bias correction (PBC) procedure to reduce bias from unmeasured confounding. Extensive simulation studies show that the proposed PS + PBC procedures can improve the efficiency and statistical power by effectively incorporating the SC into the RCT data analysis, while still control the estimation bias and Type I error inflation that might arise from unmeasured confounding. We illustrate the proposed statistical procedures with data from an augmented RCT in oncology.

Understanding the activity of antibody-drug conjugates in primary and secondary brain tumours

Antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs), a class of targeted cancer therapeutics combining monoclonal antibodies with a cytotoxic payload via a chemical linker, have already been approved for the treatment of several cancer types, with extensive clinical development of novel constructs ongoing. Primary and secondary brain tumours are associated with high mortality and morbidity, necessitating novel treatment approaches. Pharmacotherapy of brain tumours can be limited by restricted drug delivery across the blood-brain or blood-tumour barrier, although data from phase II studies of the HER2-targeted ADC trastuzumab deruxtecan indicate clinically relevant intracranial activity in patients with brain metastases from HER2⁺ breast cancer. However, depatuxizumab mafodotin, an ADC targeting wild-type EGFR and EGFR variant III, did not provide a definitive overall survival benefit in patients with newly diagnosed or recurrent EGFR-amplified glioblastoma in phase II and III trials, despite objective radiological responses in some patients. In this Review, we summarize the available data on the central nervous system activity of ADCs from trials involving patients with primary and secondary brain tumours and discuss their clinical implications. Furthermore, we explore pharmacological determinants of intracranial activity and discuss the optimal design of clinical trials to facilitate development of ADCs for the treatment of gliomas and brain metastases.

Single-arm trials supporting the approval of anticancer medicinal products in the European Union: contextualization of trial results and observed clinical benefit

BACKGROUND

Single-arm trials (SATs) can sometimes be used to support marketing authorization of anticancer medicinal products in the European Union. The level and durability of antitumor activity of the product as well as context are important aspects to determine the relevance of trial results. The aim of this study is to provide details on the contextualization of trial results and to evaluate the magnitude of benefit of medicinal products approved based on SATs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We focused on anticancer medicinal products for solid tumors approved on the basis of SAT results (2012-2021). Data were retrieved from European public assessment reports and/or published literature. The benefit of these medicinal products was evaluated via the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO)-Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (MCBS).

RESULTS

Eighteen medicinal products were approved based on 21 SATs-few medicinal products were supported by >1 SAT. For the majority of clinical trials, a clinically relevant treatment effect was (pre)specified (71.4%) and most often an accompanying sample size calculation was provided. For 10 studies, each testing a different medicinal product, a justification for the threshold for a clinically relevant treatment effect could be identified. At least 12 out of 18 applications included information to facilitate the contextualization of trial results, including six supportive studies. Of the pivotal SATs analyzed (n = 21), three were assigned an ESMO-MCBS score of 4, which corresponds to 'substantial' benefit.

CONCLUSIONS

The clinical relevance of the treatment effects shown by medicinal products for solid tumors tested in SATs is dependent on the effect size and context. To better facilitate regulatory decision making, prespecifying and motivating a clinically relevant effect and aligning the sample size to that effect is important. External controls may facilitate in the contextualization process, but the associated limitations must be addressed.

Current drug development and trial designs in neuro-oncology: report from the first American Society of Clinical Oncology and Society for Neuro-Oncology Clinical Trials Conference

Successful drug development for people with cancers of the CNS has been challenging. There are multiple barriers to successful drug development including biological factors, rarity of the disease, and ineffective use of clinical trials. Based upon a series of presentations at the First Central Nervous System Clinical Trials Conference hosted by the American Society of Clinical Oncology and the Society for Neuro-Oncology, we provide an overview on drug development and novel trial designs in neuro-oncology. This Review discusses the challenges of therapeutic development in neuro-oncology and proposes strategies to improve the drug discovery process by enriching the pipeline of promising therapies, optimising trial design, incorporating biomarkers, using external data, and maximising efficacy and reproducibility of clinical trials.

Autologous tumor lysate-loaded dendritic cell vaccination in glioblastoma: What happened to the evidence?

In patients with glioblastoma, the "DCVax-L" trial reported a survival benefit with the addition of autologous tumor lysate-loaded denditric cell vaccination to the standard-of-care (SoC) in patients with glioblastoma. The trial presented as a phase 3 externally controlled trial is showing an improvement in overall survival (OS) in patients receiving the vaccine therapy as compared to externally controlled patients, both in the newly diagnosed setting (median OS = 19.3 months versus 16.5 months; HR = 0.80; 98% CI, 0.00-0.94; P = 0.002) and in the recurrent setting (median OS = 13.2 months versus 7.8 months; HR = 0.58; 98% CI, 0.00-0.76; P < 0.001). Interestingly, the original endpoint, progression-free survival (PFS), was not improved by the experimental therapy. While we praise efforts to improve outcomes in a population representing a true unmet need, the trial's design, methods and report raise several issues undermining the ability to derive meaningful conclusion. These limitations are mainly driven by multiple changes occurring years after the trial ended. External controls were used in a trial originally randomizing patients, the primary endpoint was modified (OS instead of PFS), a new study population (recurrent glioblastoma) was added, and unplanned analyses were conducted, among several other changes. Additionally, due to inclusion criteria, the external controls likely selected patients with less favorable outcome as compared with patients enrolled in the trial, potentially biasing the reported survival benefit. In the absence of data sharing, these shortcomings will not be clarified. Dendritic cell vaccination remains a promising approach for GBM. It is therefore disappointing that due to key methodological limitations, the DCVax-L trial ultimately failed to provide sound conclusions about the potential efficacy of such approach for patients with glioblastoma.

Emulating Randomized Controlled Trials with Hybrid Control Arms in Oncology: A Case Study

This proof-of-concept study retrospectively assessed the feasibility of applying a hybrid control arm design to a completed phase III randomized controlled trial (RCT; CheckMate-057) in advanced non-small cell lung cancer using a real-world data (RWD) source. The emulated trial consists of an experimental arm (patients from the RCT experimental cohort) and a hybrid control arm (patients from the RCT and RWD control cohorts). For the RWD control cohort, this study used a nationwide electronic health record-derived de-identified database. Three frequentist statistical borrowing methods were evaluated: a two-step Cox model, a fixed Cox model, and propensity score-integrated composite likelihood ("Methods 1-3"). The experimental treatment effect for hybrid control designs were evaluated using hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence interval (CI) estimated from the Cox models accounting for covariate differences. The reduction in study duration compared to the RCT was also evaluated. All three statistical borrowing methods achieved comparable experimental treatment effects to that observed in the CheckMate-057 clinical trial, with HRs of 0.73 (95% CI: 0.59, 0.92), 0.74 (95% CI: 0.61, 0.91), 0.72 (95% CI: 0.59, 0.88) for Methods 1-3, respectively. Reduction in study duration time was 99-115 days when borrowing 30-38 events for Methods 1-3, respectively. This study demonstrated that it is feasible to emulate an RCT using a hybrid control arm design using three frequentist propensity-score based statistical borrowing methods. Selection of an appropriate, fit-for-use RWD cohort is critical to minimizing bias in experimental treatment effect.

Bevacizumab plus FOLFIRI after failure of platinum-etoposide first-line chemotherapy in patients with advanced neuroendocrine carcinoma (PRODIGE 41-BEVANEC): a randomised, multicentre, non-comparative, open-label, phase 2 trial

BACKGROUND

There is no standard second-line treatment after platinum-etoposide chemotherapy for gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine carcinoma. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab, and FOLFIRI alone, in this setting.

METHODS

We did a randomised, non-comparative, open-label, phase 2 trial (PRODIGE 41-BEVANEC) at 26 hospitals in France. We included patients aged 18 years or older with locally advanced or metastatic gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine carcinoma or neuroendocrine carcinoma of unknown primary origin, documented progressive disease during or after first-line platinum-etoposide chemotherapy, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1; block size of three), without stratification, to receive FOLFIRI (irinotecan 180 mg/m², calcium folinate 400 mg/m² or levofolinate 200 mg/m², and fluorouracil 400 mg/m² bolus then 2400 mg/m² over 46 h) plus bevacizumab 5 mg/kg or FOLFIRI alone, intravenously, every 2 weeks until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Neither patients nor investigators were masked to group assignment. The primary outcome was overall survival at 6 months after randomisation, evaluated in the modified intention-to-treat population (all enrolled and randomly assigned patients who received at least one cycle of FOLFIRI). This study is now complete and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02820857.

FINDINGS

Between Sept 5, 2017, and Feb 8, 2022, 150 patients were assessed for eligibility and 133 were enrolled and randomly assigned: 65 to the FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab group and 68 to the FOLFIRI group. 126 patients (59 in the FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab group and 67 in the FOLFIRI group) received at least one cycle of FOLFIRI and were included in the modified intention-to-treat population, 83 (66%) of whom were male and 43 (34%) were female, and the median age of the patients was 67 years (IQR 58-73). The primary tumour location was colorectal in 38 (30%) of 126 patients, pancreatic in 34 (27%), gastro-oesophageal in 22 (17%), and unknown in 23 (18%). After a median follow-up of 25·7 months (95% CI 22·0-38·2), 6-month overall survival was 53% (80% CI 43-61) in the FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab group and 60% (51-68) in the FOLFIRI group. Grade 3-4 adverse events that occurred in at least 5% of patients were neutropenia (eight [14%] patients), diarrhoea (six [10%]), and asthenia (five [8%]) in the FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab group, and neutropenia (seven [10%]) in the FOLFIRI group. One treatment-related death (ischaemic stroke) occurred in the FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab group.

INTERPRETATION

The addition of bevacizumab did not seem to increase the benefit of FOLFIRI with regard to overall survival. FOLFIRI could be considered as a standard second-line treatment in patients with gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine carcinoma.

FUNDING

French Ministry of Health and Roche SAS.

Prospectively shared control data across concurrent randomised clinical trials

Sharing data from control groups across concurrent randomised clinical trials with identical enrolment criteria and the same control therapy can translate into efficiencies for the drug development process. We discuss potential benefits and risks of prospective data-sharing plans for concurrent randomised trials.

Real-world data for precision cancer medicine-A European perspective

Leveraging real-world data (RWD) for drug access is necessary to overcome a key challenge of modern precision oncology: tackling numerous low-prevalence oncogenic mutations across cancers. Withholding a potentially active medication in patients with rare mutations for the sake of control chemotherapy or "best" supportive care is neither practicable nor ethically justifiable anymore, particularly as RWD could meanwhile be used instead, according to scientific principles outlined by the US Food and Drug Administration, European Medicines Agency and other stakeholders. However, practical implementation varies, with occasionally opposite recommendations based on the same evidence in different countries. In the face of growing need for precision drugs, more transparency of evaluation, a priori availability of guidance for the academia and industry, as well as a harmonized framework for health technology assessment across the European Union (EU) are imperative. These could in turn trigger infrastructural changes in national and pan-European registries, cancer management guidelines (e.g., frequency of routine radiologic restaging, inclusion of patient-reported outcomes), and the health data space, to ensure conformity with declared standards and facilitate extraction of RWD sets (including patient-level data) suitable for approval and pricing with minimal effort. For an EU-wide unification of precision cancer medicine, collective negotiation of drug supply contracts and funding solidarity would additionally be required to handle the financial burden. According to experience from pivotal European programs, off-label use could potentially also be harmonized across EU-states to accelerate availability of novel drugs, streamline collection of valuable RWD, and mitigate related costs through wider partnerships with pharmaceutical companies.