Time to Review the Role of Surrogate End Points in Health Policy: State of the Art and the Way Forward

A landscape of methodology and implementation of adaptive designs in cancer clinical trials

BACKGROUND

The use of adaptive designs in cancer trials has considerably increased worldwide in recent years, along with the release of various guidelines for their application. This systematic review aims to comprehensively summarize the key methodological and executive features of adaptive designs in cancer clinical trials.

METHODS

A comprehensive search from PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials was conducted to screen eligible clinical trials that employed adaptive designs and were conducted in cancer patients. The methodological and executive characteristics of adaptive designs were the main measurements extracted. Descriptive analyses, primarily consisting of frequency and percentage, were employed to analyzed and reported the data.

RESULTS

A total of 180 cancer clinical trials with adaptive designs were identified. The first three most common type of adaptive design was the group sequential design (n=114, 63.3 %), adaptive dose-finding design (n=22, 12.2 %), and adaptive platform design (n=16, 8.9 %). The results showed that 4.4 % (n=8) of trials conducted post hoc modifications, and around 29.4 % (n=53) did not provide the methods for controlling type I errors. Among phase II or above trials, 79.9 % (112/140) applied the surrogate endpoint as the primary outcome in these trials. Importantly, 27.2 % (49/180) of trials did not report clear information on the independent data monitoring committee (iDMC), and 13.3 % (n=24) without clear information on interim analyses. Interim analyses suggested 34.4 % (62/180) of trials being stopped for futility, 10.6 % (n=19) for efficacy, and 2.2 % (n=4) for safety concerns in the early stage.

CONCLUSIONS

This study emphasizes adaptive designs in cancer trials face significant challenges in their design or strict implementation according to protocol, which might significantly compromise the validity and integrity of trials. It is thus important for researchers, sponsors, and policymakers to actively oversee and guide their application.

UK Stakeholder Perspectives on Surrogate Endpoints in Cancer, and the Potential for UK Real-World Datasets to Validate Their Use in Decision-Making

Duration of overall survival in patients with cancer has lengthened due to earlier detection and improved treatments. However, these improvements have created challenges in assessing the impact of newer treatments, particularly those used early in the treatment pathway. As overall survival remains most decision-makers' preferred primary endpoint, therapeutic innovations may take a long time to be introduced into clinical practice. Moreover, it is difficult to extrapolate findings to heterogeneous populations and address the concerns of patients wishing to evaluate everyday quality and extension of life. There is growing interest in the use of surrogate or interim endpoints to demonstrate robust treatment effects sooner than is possible with measurement of overall survival. It is hoped that they could speed up patients' access to new drugs, combinations, and sequences, and inform treatment decision-making. However, while surrogate endpoints have been used by regulators for drug approvals, this has occurred on a case-by-case basis. Evidence standards are yet to be clearly defined for acceptability in health technology appraisals or to shape clinical practice. This article considers the relevance of the use of surrogate endpoints in cancer in the UK context, and explores whether collection and analysis of real-world UK data and evidence might contribute to validation.

Is Economic Evaluation and Care Commissioning Focused on Achieving the Same Outcomes? Resource-Allocation Considerations and Challenges Using England as a Case Study

Commissioning describes the process of contracting appropriate care services to address pre-identified needs through pre-agreed payment structures. Outcomes-based commissioning (i.e., paying services for pre-agreed outcomes) shares a common goal with economic evaluation: achieving value for money for relevant outcomes (e.g., health) achieved from a finite budget. We describe considerations and challenges as to the practical role of relevant outcomes for evaluation and commissioning, seeking to bridge a gap between economic evaluation evidence and care commissioning. We describe conceptual (e.g., what are 'relevant' outcomes) alongside practical considerations (e.g., quantifying and using relevant endpoint or surrogate outcomes) and pertinent issues when linking outcomes to commissioning-based payment mechanisms, using England as a case study. Economic evaluation often focuses on a single endpoint health-focused maximand, e.g., quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), whereas commissioning often focuses on activity-based surrogate outcomes (e.g., health monitoring), as easier-to-measure key performance indicators that are more acceptable (e.g., by clinicians) and amenable to being linked with payment structures. However, payments linked to endpoint and/or surrogate outcomes can lead to market inefficiencies; for example, when surrogates do not have the intended causal effect on endpoint outcomes or when service activity focuses on only people who can achieve prespecified payment-linked outcomes. Accounting for and explaining direct links from commissioners' payment structures to surrogate and then endpoint economic outcomes is a vital step to bridging a gap between economic evaluation approaches and commissioning. Decision-analytic models could aid this but they must be designed to account for relevant surrogate and endpoint outcomes, the payments assigned to such outcomes, and their interaction with the system commissioners purport to influence.

Associations Between Surrogate Markers and Clinical Outcomes for Nononcologic Chronic Disease Treatments

Importance

Surrogate markers are increasingly used as primary end points in clinical trials supporting drug approvals.

Objective

To systematically summarize the evidence from meta-analyses, systematic reviews and meta-analyses, and pooled analyses (hereafter, meta-analyses) of clinical trials examining the strength of association between treatment effects measured using surrogate markers and clinical outcomes in nononcologic chronic diseases.

Data sources

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Adult Surrogate Endpoint Table and MEDLINE from inception to March 19, 2023.

Study Selection

Three reviewers selected meta-analyses of clinical trials; meta-analyses of observational studies were excluded.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

Two reviewers extracted correlation coefficients, coefficients of determination, slopes, effect estimates, or results from meta-regression analyses between surrogate markers and clinical outcomes.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Correlation coefficient or coefficient of determination, when reported, was classified as high strength (r ≥ 0.85 or R2 ≥ 0.72); primary findings were otherwise summarized.

Results

Thirty-seven surrogate markers listed in FDA's table and used as primary end points in clinical trials across 32 unique nononcologic chronic diseases were included. For 22 (59%) surrogate markers (21 chronic diseases), no eligible meta-analysis was identified. For 15 (41%) surrogate markers (14 chronic diseases), at least 1 meta-analysis was identified, 54 in total (median per surrogate marker, 2.5; IQR, 1.3-6.0); among these, median number of trials and patients meta-analyzed was 18.5 (IQR, 12.0-43.0) and 90 056 (IQR, 20 109-170 014), respectively. The 54 meta-analyses reported 109 unique surrogate marker-clinical outcome pairs: 59 (54%) reported at least 1 r or R2, 10 (17%) of which reported at least 1 classified as high strength, whereas 50 (46%) reported slopes, effect estimates, or results of meta-regression analyses only, 26 (52%) of which reported at least 1 statistically significant result.

Conclusions and Relevance

Most surrogate markers used as primary end points in clinical trials to support FDA approval of drugs treating nononcologic chronic diseases lacked high-strength evidence of associations with clinical outcomes from published meta-analyses.

Disease-free survival as a surrogate for overall survival in HR+/HER2- early breast cancer: A correlation analysis

BACKGROUND

Overall survival (OS) is a universally accepted measure of clinical benefit; however, prolonged follow-up is needed to observe sufficient events. Disease-free survival (DFS) has been widely adopted as a primary endpoint for early breast cancer (EBC) trials, as follow-up is comparatively shorter. Here, we present an analysis evaluating DFS as a surrogate for OS for adjuvant treatment of hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HR+/HER2-) EBC.

METHODS

A systematic literature review which included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with ≥80% of adult patients with HR+/HER2- EBC was conducted. The RCTs evaluated various systemic therapeutic categories; key inclusion criteria included reporting of DFS and OS hazard ratios (HRs) and mature OS data. Spearman rank correlation and weighted linear regression analyses evaluated DFS and OS HR correlation. A scenario analysis tested base-case analysis robustness, and a parallel analysis using patient-level data was conducted.

RESULTS

The base case (N = 14 RCTs) showed an unweighted Spearman coefficient of 0.81 between OS and DFS (weighted: 0.81), with 84% of the variability in OS explained by DFS differences (R2 from weighted regression). The surrogate threshold effect (Burzykowski T, Buyse M. Pharm Stat. 2006;5:173-186) was 0.82 for DFS/OS HR. Scenario analysis (n = 9 RCTs), which excluded chemotherapy trials, and patient-level analysis using FACE trial data were consistent with the base-case analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

These analyses support DFS as a reliable surrogate endpoint for OS in adjuvant HR+/HER2- EBC trials. Using DFS as a surrogate measure will permit timelier access to novel treatments for patients with HR+/HER2- EBC.

Progression-free survival as a surrogate endpoint for overall survival in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma

OBJECTIVES

The goal of the research was to assess the quantitative relationship between median progression-free survival (PFS) and median overall survival (OS) specifically among patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) based on published randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

METHODS

Two bibliographic databases (PubMed and Embase, 1970-2017) were systematically searched for RCTs in RRMM that reported OS and PFS, followed by an updated search of studies published between 2010 and 2022 in 3 databases (Embase, MEDLINE, and EBM Reviews, 2010-2022). The association between median PFS and median OS was assessed using the nonparametric Spearman rank and parametric Pearson correlation coefficients. Subsequently, the quantitative relationship between PFS and OS was assessed using weighted least-squares regression adjusted for covariates including age, sex, and publication year. Study arms were weighted by the number of patients in each arm.

RESULTS

A total of 31 RCTs (56 treatment arms, 10,450 patients with RRMM) were included in the analysis. The average median PFS and median OS were 7.1 months (SD 5.5) and 28.1 months (SD 11.8), respectively. The Spearman and Pearson correlation coefficients between median PFS and median OS were 0.80 (P < 0.0001) and 0.79 (P < 0.0001), respectively. In individual treatment arms of RRMM trials, each 1-month increase in median PFS was associated with a 1.72-month (95% CI 1.26-2.17) increase in median OS.

CONCLUSION

Analysis of the relationship between PFS and OS incorporating more recent studies in RRMM further substantiates the use of PFS to predict OS in RRMM.

Comparison of Publications on Heated Tobacco Products With Conventional Cigarettes and Implied Desirability of the Products According to Tobacco Industry Affiliation: A Systematic Review

INTRODUCTION

Heated tobacco products (HTPs) have been advertised as "reduced-harm" tobacco products compared to conventional cigarettes (CC); however, no direct evidence supporting HTPs being desirable for human health exists. A previous systematic review reported that evidence on HTPs published in 2017 or earlier was primarily drawn from industry-related papers. We aimed to investigate whether tobacco industry-affiliated studies are more likely to conclude that HTPs are more desirable than CC.

METHODS

PubMed and Ichushi-Web were searched up to March 15, 2022, for studies on HTPs published in 2017 or after. We selected studies that assessed any measures of HTPs and CC, including secondary analyses using gray literature in English or Japanese. We excluded review articles except for a meta-analysis that met the aforementioned criteria. Data on the authors' affiliations, grant, conflict of interest, category of research subjects, and interpretation were extracted. Research members in two groups independently assessed the papers; discrepancies were solved by discussion between the groups.

RESULTS

Overall, 134 studies met the criteria. Eighty-seven (64.9%) of them were affiliated with the tobacco industry. Of the 134 studies, 56.3% (49/87) of the industry-affiliated studies versus 19.1% (9/47) of nonindustry-affiliated studies concluded that HTPs were more desirable than CC (p < .01). No study investigated clinically relevant outcomes, such as disease occurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

Publications on HTPs in the biomedical literature from January 2017 to March 2022 were dominated by tobacco industry-affiliated studies. More than half of them concluded that HTPs were more desirable than CC compared to independent studies.

IMPLICATIONS

Tobacco industry advertises HTPs as "reduced-harm" tobacco products compared to CC. HTP users tend to consider HTPs as alternative tobacco products less harmful than CC (ie, products for "harm reduction"). Our results demonstrated that papers written by tobacco industry-affiliated authors concluded that HTPs were more desirable than CC compared to papers by independent authors. However, all their judgments were based on surrogate outcomes. Surrogate outcomes are not necessarily linked to clinically relevant outcomes such as disease occurrence. Further studies on HTPs using clinically relevant outcomes are warranted by independent authors from tobacco industry.

Early Efficacy End Points in Neoadjuvant Rectal Cancer Trials: Surrogacy Revisited

Trial-level surrogacy is critical before early response endpoints are used to approve new therapies.

Association between event-free survival and overall survival in early-stage triple-negative breast cancer

Aim: This study evaluated event-free survival (EFS) as a surrogate outcome for overall survival (OS) in neoadjuvant therapy for early-stage triple-negative breast cancer (eTNBC). Methods: Meta-regression analyses based on a targeted literature review were used to evaluate the individual- and trial-level associations between EFS and OS. Results: In the individual-level analyses, 3-year EFS was a significant predictor of 5-year OS (p < 0.01; coefficient of determinations [R2]: 0.82 [95% CI: 0.68-0.91]). Additionally, there was a statistically significant association between the treatment effect on EFS and OS at the trial level (p < 0.001; R2: 0.64 [95% CI: 0.45-0.82]). Conclusion: This study demonstrates significant associations between EFS and OS and suggests that EFS is a valid surrogate for OS following neoadjuvant therapy for eTNBC.

Surrogacy and the Valuation of ATMPs: Taking Our Place in the Evidence Generation/Assessment Continuum

Medical technology is advancing rapidly, but established methods for health technology assessment are struggling to keep up. This challenge is particularly stark for the assessment of advanced therapy medicinal products-therapies often launched on the basis of single-arm studies powered to a surrogate primary endpoint. The most robust surrogacy methods investigate trial-level correlations between the treatment effect on the surrogate and the outcome of ultimate interest. However, these methods are often impossible with the evidence usually available for advanced therapy medicinal products at the time of the launch (randomized controlled trials are necessary for these advanced methods). Additionally, these surrogacy relationships are usually considered to be technology specific, adding uncertainty for any approach that primarily relies on historic data to estimate the surrogacy relationship for novel interventions such as advanced therapy medicinal products. The literature has already highlighted the need for early dialogue, staged assessment processes, and pricing arrangements that responsibly share the risk between the manufacturer and payer. However, it is our view that in addition to these critical developments, the modeling methods employed could also improve. Currently, health technology assessment practitioners typically either ignore the surrogate and simply extrapolate the endpoint of greatest patient relevance irrespective of the degree of maturity or assume historic surrogate relationships apply to the novel technology. In this opinion piece, we outline an additional avenue. By drawing on the understanding of the mechanism of action and insights generated earlier in the evidence generation/assessment continuum, cost-effectiveness modelers can make better use of the wider data available. These efforts are expected to reduce uncertainty at the time of the initial launch of pharmaceutical products and increase the value of subsequent data collection efforts.

Decline in forced vital capacity as a surrogate for mortality in patients with pulmonary fibrosis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Surrogate endpoints enable determination of meaningful treatment effects more efficiently than applying the endpoint of ultimate interest. We used data from trials of nintedanib in subjects with pulmonary fibrosis to assess decline in forced vital capacity (FVC) as a surrogate for mortality.

METHODS

Data from the nintedanib and placebo groups of trials in subjects with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, other forms of progressive pulmonary fibrosis, and pulmonary fibrosis due to systemic sclerosis (NCT00514683, NCT01335464, NCT01335477, NCT01979952, NCT02999178, NCT02597933) were pooled. Using joint models for longitudinal and time-to-event data, we assessed the association between decline in FVC % predicted and time to death over 52 weeks. The rate of change in FVC % predicted and the current value of FVC % predicted were modelled longitudinally and estimates applied as predictors in time-to-event models.

RESULTS

Among 2583 subjects with pulmonary fibrosis, both a greater rate of decline in FVC % predicted and a lower current value of FVC % predicted were associated with an increased risk of death over 52 weeks (HR 1.79 [95% CI: 1.57, 2.03] and HR 1.24 [1.17, 1.32] per 5-percentage point decrease, respectively). Associations between the rate of change in FVC % predicted and the risk of death were consistent between patients with IPF and other ILDs.

CONCLUSION

Data from clinical trials in subjects with pulmonary fibrosis of diverse aetiology demonstrate a strong association between decline in FVC % predicted and mortality over 52 weeks, supporting FVC decline as a surrogate for mortality in these patients.

Evaluation of Digitalisation in Healthcare and the Quantification of the "Unmeasurable"

Evaluating healthcare digitalisation, where technology implementation and adoption transforms existing socio-organisational processes, presents various challenges for outcome assessments. Populations are diverse, interventions are complex and evolving over time, meaningful comparisons are difficult as outcomes vary between settings, and outcomes take a long time to materialise and stabilise. Digitalisation may also have unanticipated impacts. We here discuss the limitations of evaluating the digitalisation of healthcare, and describe how qualitative and quantitative approaches can complement each other to facilitate investment and implementation decisions. In doing so, we argue how existing approaches have focused on measuring what is easily measurable and elevating poorly chosen values to inform investment decisions. Limited attention has been paid to understanding processes that are not easily measured even though these can have significant implications for contextual transferability, sustainability and scale-up of interventions. We use what is commonly known as the McNamara Fallacy to structure our discussions. We conclude with recommendations on how we envisage the development of mixed methods approaches going forward in order to address shortcomings.

Imaging of early-stage osteoarthritis: the needs and challenges for diagnosis and classification

In an effort to boost the development of new management strategies for OA, there is currently a shift in focus towards the diagnosis and treatment of early-stage OA. It is important to distinguish diagnosis from classification of early-stage OA. Diagnosis takes place in clinical practice, whereas classification is a process to stratify participants with OA in clinical research. For both purposes, there is an important opportunity for imaging, especially with MRI. The needs and challenges differ for early-stage OA diagnosis versus classification. Although it fulfils the need of high sensitivity and specificity for making a correct diagnosis, implementation of MRI in clinical practice is challenged by long acquisition times and high costs. For classification in clinical research, more advanced MRI protocols can be applied, such as quantitative, contrast-enhanced, or hybrid techniques, as well as advanced image analysis methods including 3D morphometric assessments of joint tissues and artificial intelligence approaches. It is necessary to follow a step-wise and structured approach that comprises, technical validation, biological validation, clinical validation, qualification, and cost-effectiveness, before new imaging biomarkers can be implemented in clinical practice or clinical research.

A framework for the definition and interpretation of the use of surrogate endpoints in interventional trials

Background

Interventional trials that evaluate treatment effects using surrogate endpoints have become increasingly common. This paper describes four linked empirical studies and the development of a framework for defining, interpreting and reporting surrogate endpoints in trials.

Methods

As part of developing the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) and SPIRIT (Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials) extensions for randomised trials reporting surrogate endpoints, we undertook a scoping review, e-Delphi study, consensus meeting, and a web survey to examine current definitions and stakeholder (including clinicians, trial investigators, patients and public partners, journal editors, and health technology experts) interpretations of surrogate endpoints as primary outcome measures in trials.

Findings

Current surrogate endpoint definitional frameworks are inconsistent and unclear. Surrogate endpoints are used in trials as a substitute of the treatment effects of an intervention on the target outcome(s) of ultimate interest, events measuring how patients feel, function, or survive. Traditionally the consideration of surrogate endpoints in trials has focused on biomarkers (e.g., HDL cholesterol, blood pressure, tumour response), especially in the medical product regulatory setting. Nevertheless, the concept of surrogacy in trials is potentially broader. Intermediate outcomes that include a measure of function or symptoms (e.g., angina frequency, exercise tolerance) can also be used as substitute for target outcomes (e.g., all-cause mortality)-thereby acting as surrogate endpoints. However, we found a lack of consensus among stakeholders on accepting and interpreting intermediate outcomes in trials as surrogate endpoints or target outcomes. In our assessment, patients and health technology assessment experts appeared more likely to consider intermediate outcomes to be surrogate endpoints than clinicians and regulators.

Interpretation

There is an urgent need for better understanding and reporting on the use of surrogate endpoints, especially in the setting of interventional trials. We provide a framework for the definition of surrogate endpoints (biomarkers and intermediate outcomes) and target outcomes in trials to improve future reporting and aid stakeholders' interpretation and use of trial surrogate endpoint evidence.

Funding

SPIRIT-SURROGATE/CONSORT-SURROGATE project is Medical Research Council Better Research Better Health (MR/V038400/1) funded.

A paradigm shift for cardiovascular outcome evaluation in diabetes: Major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) to major adverse vascular events (MAVE)

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Drugs for diabetes are required to demonstrate cardiovascular safety through CV outcome trials (CVOT). The pre-defined end-points for cardiovascular outcome studies may not be sufficient to capture all clinically relevant atherosclerotic cardio vascular disease (ASCVD) events particularly peripheral arterial disease (PAD).

METHODS

We planned a scoping review and searched database to identify CVOT conducted in population with diabetes measuring lower limb events due to PAD as the primary outcome measure. We also searched CVOT for reported differential cardiovascular outcomes in population with PAD.

RESULTS

We identified that CV outcomes are measured as 3 point major adverse cardiovascular outcomes (3P-MACE) that includes nonfatal MI and nonfatal stroke or 4P-MACE that included additional unstable angina which is further expanded to 5P-MACE by the inclusion of hospitalization for heart failure (HHF). These CV end points are captured as surrogate for CV mortality based on the biological plausibility of relation between the surrogate and final outcome from pathophysiological studies. We found the prevalence of PAD is no lesser than other CV events in people with diabetes. Moreover, PAD contributes to the significant morbidity associated with diabetes as a surrogate for mortality. However, none of the CVOT with anti-diabetic drugs include PAD events as primary outcome measure despite the inclusion of 6-25 % participants with PAD in major CVOT. PAD outcomes are objectively measurable with tibial arterial waveforms and clinical end-point as lower extremity amputation. PAD outcomes do improve with treatment including intensive glycemic control and novel oral anticoagulants. We suggest the inclusion of PAD to MACE as a pre-specified outcome for a comprehensive capture of major adverse vascular event in future studies for people with diabetes.

CONCLUSIONS

MACE should be expanded to include PAD event as major adverse vascular event in cardiovascular outcome studies since PAD is clinically relevant and objectively measurable in diabetes.

Association Between Intermediate End Points, Progression-free Survival, and Overall Survival in First-line Advanced or Recurrent Endometrial Cancer

PURPOSE

Advanced/recurrent endometrial cancer is associated with poor long-term outcomes. Clinical studies of novel regimens are ongoing, but given that data on overall survival (OS) take a long time to mature, surrogate end points are often used to support clinical-research interpretation. The aim of this study was to explore the correlation between progression-free survival (PFS)/time to progression (TTP) and OS across multiple time points in the first-line treatment of advanced/recurrent endometrial cancer.

METHODS

This study comprised meta-analyses of Phase 2/3 randomized, controlled trials of first-line treatments in patients with advanced primary or first-recurrent endometrial cancer identified via systematic literature review. The strength of the surrogacy relationship was assessed by correlation analyses (estimated with Spearman and Pearson correlation coefficients) and weighted linear regression.

FINDINGS

Data from 15 studies were included. PFS and TTP (TTP was reported in one study only) were highly correlated with future OS at multiple time points (Spearman values, 0.83-0.90; Pearson values, 0.86-0.93), suggesting that a change in PFS/TTP would likely be correlated with a change in OS in the same direction. On weighted linear regression, a 10% increase in PFS/TTP probability was significantly associated with a 9.3% to 13.3% increase in the probability of future OS. The strong positive association between PFS/TTP and OS was supported by findings from sensitivity analyses based on identified sources of interstudy heterogeneity.

IMPLICATIONS

PFS/TTP is a good potential candidate for predicting long-term OS outcomes in trials of first-line treatment in patients with advanced/recurrent endometrial cancer. The findings from this report may help to inform health-authority and clinical decision makers that PFS/TTP improvements are likely to translate into subsequent OS improvements once data mature.

Definitions, acceptability, limitations, and guidance in the use and reporting of surrogate end points in trials: a scoping review

OBJECTIVE

To synthesize the current literature on the use of surrogate end points, including definitions, acceptability, and limitations of surrogate end points and guidance for their design/reporting, into trial reporting items.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

Literature was identified through searching bibliographic databases (until March 1, 2022) and gray literature sources (until May 27, 2022). Data were thematically analyzed into four categories: (1) definitions, (2) acceptability, (3) limitations and challenges, and (4) guidance, and synthesized into reporting guidance items.

RESULTS

After screening, 90 documents were included: 79% (n = 71) had data on definitions, 77% (n = 69) on acceptability, 72% (n = 65) on limitations and challenges, and 61% (n = 55) on guidance. Data were synthesized into 17 potential trial reporting items: explicit statements on the use of surrogate end point(s) and justification for their use (items 1-6); methodological considerations, including whether sample size calculations were informed by surrogate validity (items 7-9); reporting of results for composite outcomes containing a surrogate end point (item 10); discussion and interpretation of findings (items 11-14); plans for confirmatory studies, collecting data on the surrogate end point and target outcome, and data sharing (items 15-16); and informing trial participants about using surrogate end points (item 17).

CONCLUSION

The review identified and synthesized items on the use of surrogate end points in trials; these will inform the development of the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials-SURROGATE and Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials-SURROGATE extensions.

Association between event-free survival and overall survival after neoadjuvant treatment for non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

We wanted to evaluate if event-free survival (EFS) is a reliable surrogate for overall survival (OS) in patients with resectable non-small cell lung cancer (r-NSCLC) receiving neoadjuvant therapy. We conducted a systematic literature review and meta-analysis to investigate the statistical association between EFS and OS.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Electronic databases were searched on 30 July 2021 to identify sources reporting both EFS and OS data in patients with stage I-IIIB r-NSCLC receiving neoadjuvant therapy. Correlation and regression analyses evaluated the association between the effect of treatment on EFS and OS using log-hazard ratios (HRs). Sources in which the entire population had epidermal growth factor receptor mutations were excluded from the analyses.

RESULTS

We identified 74 sources, of which 8 reported EFS and OS HRs from randomized controlled trials. Based on these, we found a positive linear correlation and a strong association between EFS and OS log-HRs (weighted Pearson's correlation coefficient r = 0.864; 95% confidence interval 0.809-0.992; P = 0.006; random-effects meta-regression, R2 = 0.777).

CONCLUSIONS

We found a strong association between treatment effects for EFS and OS, indicating that improvements in EFS are likely to be predictive of improvements in OS. EFS may therefore be a reliable surrogate for OS after neoadjuvant therapy in r-NSCLC.

Potential surrogate outcomes in individuals at high risk for incident knee osteoarthritis

OBJECTIVE

To study potential surrogate outcomes for osteoarthritis (OA) incidence by evaluating the association of short-term changes in clinical and imaging biomarkers with long-term clinical knee OA incidence.

DESIGN

Middle-aged women with overweight/obesity, but free of knee symptoms were recruited through their general practitioners. At baseline, after 2.5 years, and after 6.5 years, questionnaires, physical examination, radiographs, and Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans were obtained. The percentage of knees with a minimal clinically important difference for knee pain severity, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain/stiffness/function, and joint space narrowing, and of those with progression/regression of medial knee alignment, chronic knee pain, radiographic osteophytes, and cartilage defects, bone marrow lesions, osteophytes, and effusion/synovitis on MRI were determined. For each of these potential surrogate outcomes with ≥10% improvement or progression in the population over 2.5 years, the association with incident clinical knee OA, defined using the combined ACR-criteria, after 6.5 years was determined.

RESULTS

Most pre-defined potential surrogate outcomes showed ≥10% change in the population over 2.5 years, but only worsening of TF cartilage defects, worsening of TF osteophytes on MRI, and an increase in pain severity were significantly associated with greater clinical knee OA incidence after 6.5 years. These potential surrogate outcomes had high specificity and negative predictive value (89-91%) and low sensitivity and positive predictive value (20-28%) CONCLUSIONS: Worsening of TF cartilage defects and TF osteophytes on MRI, and increased pain severity could be seen as surrogate outcomes for long-term OA incidence. However, higher positive predictive values seem warranted for the applicability of these factors in future preventive trials.

Evaluation of heart failure admission as a surrogate for mortality in randomized clinical trials: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Heart failure (HF) admission is used as a study endpoint in clinical trials. However, it remains unclear whether it can be a valid surrogate endpoint for mortality.

OBJECTIVES

To validate whether HF admission is a valid surrogate for mortality.

METHODS

In PubMed and EMBASE, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of interventions to treat patients with heart failure at the enrolment were searched on 13 April 2022. We extracted RCTs in which event numbers of both HF admission and all-cause mortality were reported as either primary or secondary outcomes. Trial-level correlations (R-squared) between HF admission and mortality were assessed. We performed subgroup analyses by study year, follow-up duration, baseline HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) or HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), and whether the intervention was pharmacological. We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guideline.

RESULTS

A total of 117 RCTs met the criteria for inclusion. Overall, the trial-level R-squared between HF admission and all-cause mortality was 0.39 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.26 to 0.53). However, in the subgroup analyses, the trial-level R-squared was increased when the follow-up duration was ≥24 months (0.70 [95% CI: 0.55, 0.85]), when intervention was pharmacological (0.51 [95% CI: 0.34, 0.68]) and when the baseline HF type was HFrEF (0.57 [95% CI: 0.42, 0.73]).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings indicate that HF admission may not always be a valid surrogate for mortality in patients with HF. Rather, the surrogacy of HF admission may be dependent on clinical background and interventions.

A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study on Superior Vena Cava Resection in Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer Surgery

BACKGROUND

Surgery for non-small-cell lung cancers (NSCLCs) invading the superior vena cava (SVC) is rarely performed due to surgical complexities and reported poor prognoses. Different methods have been described to reconstruct the SVC, such as direct suture, patch use or prosthesis, according to its circumferential involvement. The aim of our study was to analyze the short- and long-term results of different types of SVC resection and reconstruction for T4 NSCLCs.

METHODS

Between January 2000 and December 2019, 80 patients received an anatomical lung resection with SVC surgery in this multicenter retrospective study. The partial resection and direct suture or patch reconstruction group included 64 patients, while the complete resection and prosthesis reconstruction group included 16 patients. The primary endpoints were as follows: long-term survival and disease-free survival. The secondary endpoints were as follows: perioperative complications and 30- and 90-day mortality. Unpaired t-tests or Mann-Whitney U tests for non-parametric variables were applied to discrete or continuous data, and the chi-square test was applied to dichotomous or categorical data. Survival rates were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using the log-rank test.

RESULTS

No differences were found between the two groups in terms of general characteristics and surgical, oncological and survival outcomes. In particular, there were no differences in terms of early (50.0% vs. 68.8%, p = 0.178) and late complication frequency (12.5% vs. 12.5%, p = 1.000), 30- and 90-day mortality, R status, recurrence, overall survival (33.89 ± 40.35 vs. 35.70 ± 51.43 months, p = 0.432) and disease-free survival (27.56 ± 40.36 vs. 31.28 ± 53.08 months, p = 0.668). The multivariate analysis demonstrated that age was the only independent predictive factor for overall survival.

CONCLUSIONS

According to our results, SVC resection has good oncological and survival outcomes, regardless of the proportion of circumferential involvement and the type of reconstruction.

Surrogate endpoints in trials: a call for better reporting

Using a surrogate endpoint as a substitute for a patient-relevant final outcome enables randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to be conducted more efficiently. However, the use of surrogates remains controversial and there is currently no guideline for the reporting of RCTs using surrogate endpoints; therefore, we seek to develop SPIRIT (Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials) and CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) extensions to improve the reporting of these trials. We would like to invite interested individuals (trial methodologists, journal editors, healthcare industry, regulators and payers, and patient/public representative groups), particularly those with experience in the use of surrogate endpoints in trials.

High-clearance anti-amyloid immunotherapies in Alzheimer's disease. Part 1: Meta-analysis and review of efficacy and safety data, and medico-economical aspects

In 2021, aducanumab, an immunotherapy targeting amyloid-β, was approved for Alzheimer's disease (AD) by the US Food and Drug Administration thanks to positive results on a putative biological surrogate marker. This approval has raised an unprecedented controversy. It was followed by a refusal of the European Medicine Agency, which does not allow the marketing of drugs solely on biological arguments and raised safety issues, and important US coverage limitations by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Two other anti-amyloid immunotherapies showed significant results regarding a clinical outcome in phase 2 trials, and five drugs are being studied in phase 3 trials. Compared to those tested in previous trials of the 2010s, the common feature and novelty of these anti-amyloid immunotherapies is their ability to induce a high clearance of amyloid load, as measured with positron emission tomography, in the brain of early-stage biomarker-proven AD patients. Here, we review the available evidence regarding efficacy and safety data and medico-economical aspects for high-clearance anti-amyloid immunotherapies. We also perform frequentist and Bayesian meta-analyses of the clinical efficacy and safety of the highest dose groups from the two aducanumab phase 3 trials and the donanemab and lecanemab phase 2 trials. When pooled together, the data from high-clearance anti-amyloid immunotherapies trials confirm a statistically significant clinical effect of these drugs on cognitive decline after 18 months (difference in cognitive decline measured with CDR-SB after 18 months between the high dose immunotherapy groups vs. placebo = -0.24 points; P=0.04, frequentist random-effect model), with results on ADAS-Cog being the most statistically robust. However, this effect remains below the previously established minimal clinically relevant values. In parallel, the drugs significantly increased the occurrence of amyloid-related imaging abnormalities-edema (ARIA-E: risk ratio=13.39; P<0.0001), ARIA-hemorrhage (risk ratio=2.78; P=0.0002), and symptomatic and serious ARIA (7/1321=0.53% in the high dose groups versus 0/1446 in the placebo groups; risk ratio=6.44; P=0.04). The risk/benefit ratio of high-clearance immunotherapies in early AD is so far questionable after 18 months. Identifying subgroups of better responders, the perspective of combination therapies, and a longer follow-up may help improve their clinical relevance. Finally, the preliminary evidence from medico-economical analyses seems to indicate that the current cost of aducanumab in the US is not in reasonable alignment with its clinical benefits.

A group-based exercise and behavioural maintenance intervention for adults over 65 years with mobility limitations: the REACT RCT

Background

Mobility limitation in older age reduces quality of life, generates substantial health- and social-care costs, and increases mortality.

Objective

The REtirement in ACTion (REACT) trial aimed to establish whether or not a community-based active ageing intervention could prevent decline in physical functioning in older adults already at increased risk of mobility limitation.

Design

A multicentre, pragmatic, two-arm, parallel-group randomised controlled trial with parallel process and health economic evaluations.

Setting

Urban and semi-rural locations across three sites in England.

Participants

Physically frail or pre-frail older adults (aged ≥ 65 years; Short Physical Performance Battery score of 4–9). Recruitment was primarily via 35 primary care practices.

Interventions

Participants were randomly assigned to receive brief advice (three healthy ageing education sessions) or a 12-month, group-based, multimodal exercise and behavioural maintenance programme delivered in fitness and community centres. Randomisation was stratified by site and used a minimisation algorithm to balance age, sex and Short Physical Performance Battery score. Data collection and analyses were blinded.

Main outcome measures

The primary outcome was change in lower limb physical function (Short Physical Performance Battery score) at 24 months, analysed using an intention-to-treat analysis. The economic evaluation adopted the NHS and Personal Social Services perspective.

Results

Between June 2016 and October 2017, 777 participants (mean age 77.6 years, standard deviation 6.8 years; 66% female; mean Short Physical Performance Battery score 7.37, standard deviation 1.56) were randomised to the intervention arm (n = 410) or the control arm (n = 367). Data collection was completed in October 2019. Primary outcome data at 24 months were provided by 628 (80.8%) participants. At the 24-month follow-up, the Short Physical Performance Battery score was significantly greater in the intervention arm (mean 8.08, standard deviation 2.87) than in the control arm (mean 7.59, standard deviation 2.61), with an adjusted mean difference of 0.49 (95% confidence interval 0.06 to 0.92). The difference in lower limb function between intervention and control participants was clinically meaningful at both 12 and 24 months. Self-reported physical activity significantly increased in the intervention arm compared with the control arm, but this change was not observed in device-based physical activity data collected during the trial. One adverse event was related to the intervention. Attrition rates were low (19% at 24 months) and adherence was high. Engagement with the REACT intervention was associated with positive changes in exercise competence, relatedness and enjoyment and perceived physical, social and mental well-being benefits. The intervention plus usual care was cost-effective compared with care alone over the 2 years of REACT; the price year was 2019. In the base-case scenario, the intervention saved £103 per participant, with a quality-adjusted life-year gain of 0.04 (95% confidence interval 0.006 to 0.074) within the 2-year trial window. Lifetime horizon modelling estimated that further cost savings and quality-adjusted life-year gains were accrued up to 15 years post randomisation.

Conclusion

A relatively low-resource, 1-year multimodal exercise and behavioural maintenance intervention can help older adults to retain physical functioning over a 24-month period. The results indicate that the well-established trajectory of declining physical functioning in older age is modifiable.

Limitations

Participants were not blinded to study arm allocation. However, the primary outcome was independently assessed by blinded data collectors. The secondary outcome analyses were exploratory, with no adjustment for multiple testing, and should be interpreted accordingly.

Future work

Following refinements guided by the process evaluation findings, the REACT intervention is suitable for large-scale implementation. Further research will optimise implementation of REACT at scale.

Trial registration

This trial is registered as ISRCTN45627165.

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Public Health Research programme and will be published in full in Public Health Research; Vol. 10, No. 14. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Chimeric Antigen Receptor T-Cell Therapies: Barriers and Solutions to Access

Chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapies are relatively new treatments for patients with heavily pretreated hematologic malignancies. Although these innovative therapies can offer substantial benefit to patients with limited alternative treatment options, patient-access barriers exist. Conventional clinical trials are time-consuming and may be limited by strict patient eligibility criteria, resources, and availability of enrollment slots. Because of the complexity of the CAR-T administration process, treatment delivery can be associated with additional burden for the patient, including requiring patients to reside close to treatment centers and remain with a caregiver after infusion. Manufacturing of CAR-T cells is completed in specialized facilities and depends on the availability of reagents, manufacturing workforce, and timely transportation. CAR-T therapy is costly, and many US health plans restrict coverage of cell and gene therapies. Several of the existing challenges because of these barriers have been exacerbated during the COVID-19 pandemic. This review discusses these barriers and proposes some potential solutions to improving patient access, including innovation in clinical trial design and manufacturing, location of treatment delivery, and key stakeholder opinions regarding treatment and reimbursement. We propose a call to action for key stakeholder groups to address these barriers to CAR-T therapy to expand treatment access for patients. Future collaboration between key stakeholders, including payers, regulatory agencies, and industry/academia, will be critical to continue to address these barriers and enhance patient access to these therapies.

The Validity of Surrogate Endpoints in Sub Groups of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Patients Defined by Treatment Class and KRAS Status

Background and Aim: Findings from the literature suggest that the validity of surrogate endpoints in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) may depend on a treatments' mechanism of action. We explore this and the impact of Kirsten rat sarcoma (KRAS) status on surrogacy patterns in mCRC. Methods: A systematic review was undertaken to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for pharmacological therapies in mCRC. Bayesian meta-analytic methods for surrogate endpoint evaluation were used to evaluate surrogate relationships across all RCTs, by KRAS status and treatment class. Surrogate endpoints explored were progression free survival (PFS) as a surrogate endpoint for overall survival (OS), and tumour response (TR) as a surrogate for PFS and OS. Results: 66 RCTs were identified from the systematic review. PFS showed a strong surrogate relationship with OS across all data and in subgroups by KRAS status. The relationship appeared stronger within individual treatment classes compared to the overall analysis. The TR-PFS and TR-OS relationships were found to be weak overall but stronger within the Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor + Chemotherapy (EGFR + Chemo) treatment class; both overall and in the wild type (WT) patients for TR-PFS, but not in patients with the mutant (MT) KRAS status where data were limited. Conclusions: PFS appeared to be a good surrogate endpoint for OS. TR showed a moderate surrogate relationship with PFS and OS for the EGFR + Chemo treatment class. There was some evidence of impact of the mechanism of action on the strength of the surrogacy patterns in mCRC, but little evidence of the impact of KRAS status on the validity of surrogate endpoints.

Identifying surrogate markers in real-world comparative effectiveness research

In comparative effectiveness research (CER), leveraging short-term surrogates to infer treatment effects on long-term outcomes can guide policymakers evaluating new treatments. Numerous statistical procedures for identifying surrogates have been proposed for randomized clinical trials (RCTs), but no methods currently exist to evaluate the proportion of treatment effect (PTE) explained by surrogates in real-world data (RWD), which have become increasingly common. To address this knowledge gap, we propose inverse probability weighted (IPW) and doubly robust (DR) estimators of an optimal transformation of the surrogate and the corresponding PTE measure. We demonstrate that the proposed estimators are consistent and asymptotically normal, and the DR estimator is consistent when either the propensity score model or outcome regression model is correctly specified. Our proposed estimators are evaluated through extensive simulation studies. In two RWD settings, we show that our method can identify and validate surrogate markers for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).

Development of a framework and decision tool for the evaluation of health technologies based on surrogate endpoint evidence

In the drive toward faster patient access to treatments, health technology assessment (HTA) agencies and payers are increasingly faced with reliance on evidence based on surrogate endpoints, increasing decision uncertainty. Despite the development of a small number of evaluation frameworks, there remains no consensus on the detailed methodology for handling surrogate endpoints in HTA practice. This research overviews the methods and findings of four empirical studies undertaken as part of COMED (Pushing the Boundaries of Cost and Outcome Analysis of Medical Technologies) program work package 2 with the aim of analyzing international HTA practice of the handling and considerations around the use of surrogate endpoint evidence. We have synthesized the findings of these empirical studies, in context of wider contemporary body of methodological and policy-related literature on surrogate endpoints, to develop a web-based decision tool to support HTA agencies and payers when faced with surrogate endpoint evidence. Our decision tool is intended for use by HTA agencies and their decision-making committees together with the wider community of HTA stakeholders (including clinicians, patient groups, and healthcare manufacturers). Having developed this tool, we will monitor its use and we welcome feedback on its utility.

Implications of Oncology Trial Design and Uncertainties in Efficacy-Safety Data on Health Technology Assessments

Background: Advances in cancer medicines have resulted in tangible health impacts, but the magnitude of benefits of approved cancer medicines could vary greatly. Health Technology Assessment (HTA) is a multidisciplinary process used to inform resource allocation through a systematic value assessment of health technology. This paper reviews the challenges in conducting HTA for cancer medicines arising from oncology trial designs and uncertainties of safety-efficacy data. Methods: Multiple databases (PubMed, Scopus and Google Scholar) and grey literature (public health agencies and governmental reports) were searched to inform this policy narrative review. Results: A lack of robust efficacy-safety data from clinical trials and other relevant sources of evidence has made HTA for cancer medicines challenging. The approval of cancer medicines through expedited pathways has increased in recent years, in which surrogate endpoints or biomarkers for patient selection have been widely used. Using these surrogate endpoints has created uncertainties in translating surrogate measures into patient-centric clinically (survival and quality of life) and economically (cost-effectiveness and budget impact) meaningful outcomes, with potential effects on diverting scarce health resources to low-value or detrimental interventions. Potential solutions include policy harmonization between regulatory and HTA authorities, commitment to generating robust post-marketing efficacy-safety data, managing uncertainties through risk-sharing agreements, and using value frameworks. Conclusion: A lack of robust efficacy-safety data is a central problem for conducting HTA of cancer medicines, potentially resulting in misinformed resource allocation.

Direct AT2R Stimulation Slows Post-stroke Cognitive Decline in the 5XFAD Alzheimer's Disease Mice

Alzheimer's disease (AD), currently the single leading cause of death still on the rise, almost always coexists alongside vascular cognitive impairment (VCI). In fact, the ischemic disease affects up to 90% of AD patients, with strokes and major infarctions representing over a third of vascular lesions. Studies also confirmed that amyloid plaques, typical of AD, are much more likely to cause dementia if strokes or cerebrovascular damage also exist, leading to the term "mixed pathology" cognitive impairment. Although its incidence is expected to grow, there are no satisfactory treatments. There is hence an urgent need for safe and effective therapies that preserve cognition, maintain function, and prevent the clinical deterioration that results from the progression of this irreversible, neurodegenerative disease. To our knowledge, this is the first study to investigate the effects of long-term treatment with C21, a novel angiotensin II type 2 receptor (AT2R) agonist, on the development of "mixed pathology" cognitive impairment. This was accomplished using a unique model that employs the fundamental elements of both AD and VCI. Treatment with C21/vehicle was started 1 h post-stroke and continued for 5 weeks in mice with concurrent AD pathology. Efficacy was established through a series of functional tests assessing various aspects of cognition, including spatial learning, short-term/working memory, long-term/reference memory, and cognitive flexibility, in addition to the molecular markers characteristic of AD. Our findings demonstrate that C21 treatment preserves cognitive function, maintains cerebral blood flow, and reduces Aβ accumulation and toxic tau phosphorylation in AD animals post-stroke.

Informed decision-making: Statistical methodology for surrogacy evaluation and its role in licensing and reimbursement assessments

The desire, by patients and society, for faster access to therapies has driven a long tradition of the use of surrogate endpoints in the evaluation of pharmaceuticals and, more recently, biologics and other innovative medical technologies. The consequent need for statistical validation of potential surrogate outcome measures is a prime example on the theme of statistical support for decision-making in health technology assessment (HTA). Following the pioneering methodology based on hypothesis testing that Prentice presented in 1989, a host of further methods, both frequentist and Bayesian, have been developed to enable the value of a putative surrogate outcome to be determined. This rich methodological seam has generated practical methods for surrogate evaluation, the most recent of which are based on the principles of information theory and bring together ideas from the causal effects and causal association paradigms. Following our synopsis of statistical methods, we then consider how regulatory authorities (on licensing) and payer and HTA agencies (on reimbursement) use clinical trial evidence based on surrogate outcomes. We review existing HTA surrogate outcome evaluative frameworks. We conclude with recommendations for further steps: (1) prioritisation by regulators and payers of the application of formal surrogate outcome evaluative frameworks, (2) application of formal Bayesian decision-analytic methods to support reimbursement decisions, and (3) greater utilization of conditional surrogate-based licensing and reimbursement approvals, with subsequent reassessment of treatments in confirmatory trials based on final patient-relevant outcomes.

Risk assessment tools for survival prognosis: An era of new surrogacy endpoints for clinical outcome measurement in pulmonary arterial hypertension clinical trials?

Developing a new medication in a rare disease indication like pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) is very challenging. This is especially true now that clinical trials often employ time to clinical worsening (TTCW) as an endpoint (thus requiring a relatively large and lengthy trial) and since patients are more frequently prescribed combination therapy. During the last few decades, several tools have been developed to predict mortality in PAH and have demonstrated generally good discrimination. The objective of this review article is to assess the available data on the different tools and methods described in the literature and identify potential candidates that could be used as surrogate endpoints in pivotal randomized clinical trials in future. Some of these tools have been validated in various registries and in post-hoc analyses of clinical trial data, but none have been assessed in a prospective clinical trial and we still lack the evidence necessary for endorsement by health authorities. In this review, we identify several promising options that warrant further investigation as potential surrogate endpoints in clinical trials to replace TTCW or 6-minute walk distance. Prospective inclusion of such tools in new clinical trials may help build a stronger surrogacy for prognosis of disease progression and mortality.

Cost-effectiveness of a physical activity and behaviour maintenance programme on functional mobility decline in older adults: an economic evaluation of the REACT (Retirement in Action) trial

BACKGROUND

Mobility limitations in older populations have a substantial impact on health outcomes, quality of life, and social care costs. The Retirement in Action (REACT) randomised controlled trial assessed a 12-month community-based group physical activity and behaviour maintenance intervention to help prevent decline in physical functioning in older adults at increased risk of mobility limitation. We aimed to do an economic evaluation of the REACT trial to investigate whether the intervention is cost-effective.

METHODS

In this health economic evaluation, we did cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses of the REACT programme versus standard care on the basis of resource use, primary outcome, and health-related quality-of-life data measured in the REACT trial. We also developed a decision analytic Markov model that forecasts the mobility of recipients beyond the 24-month follow-up of the trial and translated this into future costs and potential benefit to health-related quality of life using the National Health Service and Personal Social Services perspective. Participants completed questionnaire booklets at baseline, and at 6, 12, and 24 months after randomisation, which included a resource use questionnaire and the EQ-5D-5L and 36-item short-form survey (SF-36) health-related quality-of-life instruments. The cost of delivering the intervention was estimated by identifying key resources, such as REACT session leader time, time of an individual to coordinate the programme, and venue hire. EQ-5D-5L and SF-36 responses were converted to preference-based utility values, which were used to estimate quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) over the 24-month trial follow-up using the area-under-the-curve method. We used generalised linear models to examine the effect of the REACT programme on costs and QALYs and adjust for baseline covariates. Costs and QALYs beyond 12 months were discounted at 3·5% per year. This is a pre-planned analysis of the REACT trial; the trial itself is registered with ISRCTN (ISRCTN45627165).

FINDINGS

The 12-month REACT programme was estimated to cost £622 per recipient to deliver. The most substantial cost components are the REACT session leader time (£309 per participant), venue hire (£109), and the REACT coordinator time (£80). The base-case analysis of the trial-based economic evaluation showed that reductions in health and social care usage due to the REACT programme could offset the REACT delivery costs (£3943 in the intervention group vs £4043 in the control group; difference: -£103 [95% CI -£695 to £489]) with a health benefit of 0·04 QALYs (0·009-0·071; 1·354 QALYs in the intervention group vs 1·314 QALYs in the control group) within the 24-month timeframe of the trial.

INTERPRETATION

The REACT programme could be considered a cost-effective approach for improving the health-related quality of life of older adults at risk of mobility limitations.

FUNDING

National Institute for Health Research Public Health Research Programme.

Four Aspects Affecting Health Economic Decision Models and Their Validation

Health care decision makers in many jurisdictions use cost-effectiveness analysis based on health economic decision models for policy decisions regarding coverage and price negotiation for medicines and medical devices. While validation of health economic decision models has always been considered important, many reviews of model-based cost-effectiveness studies report limitations regarding their validation. The current opinion paper discusses four aspects of current health economic decision modeling with relevance for future directions in model validation: increased use of complex models, international cooperation, open-source modeling, and stakeholder involvement. First, new, more complex clinical study designs and treatment strategies may require relatively complex model structures and/or input data analyses. Simultaneously, more widespread technical knowledge along with wider data availability have led to a broader range of model types. This puts extra requirements on model validation and transparency. Second, increased international cooperation of policy makers and, in particular, health technology assessment (HTA) authorities in performing model assessments is discussed in relation to the repeated use of health economic models (multi-use disease models). We argue such coordinated efforts may benefit model validity. Third, open-source modeling is discussed as one possible answer to increased transparency requirements. Finally, involvement of all relevant stakeholders throughout the whole decision process is an ongoing development that necessarily also includes health economic modeling. We argue this implies that model validity should be considered in a broader perspective, with more focus on conceptual modeling, model transparency, accuracy requirements, and choice of relevant model outcomes than previously.

Study design flaws and statistical challenges in evaluating fertility treatments

Health interventions should be tested before being introduced into clinical practice, to find out whether they work and whether they are harmful. However, research studies will only provide reliable answers to these questions if they are appropriately designed and analysed. But these are not trivial tasks. We review some methodological challenges that arise when evaluating fertility interventions and explain the implications for a non-statistical audience. These include flexibility in outcomes and analyses; use of surrogate outcomes instead of live birth; use of inappropriate denominators; evaluating cumulative outcomes and time to live birth; allowing each patient or couple to contribute to a research study more than once. We highlight recurring errors and present solutions. We conclude by highlighting the importance of collaboration between clinical and methodological experts, as well as people with experience of subfertility, for realising high-quality research.

Lay summary

We do research to find out whether fertility treatments are beneficial and to make sure they don't cause harm. However, research will only provide reliable answers if it is done properly. It is not unusual for researchers to make mistakes when they are designing research studies and analysing the data that we get from them. In this review, we describe some of the mistakes people make when they do research about fertility treatments and explain how to avoid them. These include challenges which arise due to the large number of things that can be measured and reported when looking to see if fertility treatments work; failure to check whether the treatment increases the number of live births; failing to include all study participants in calculations;challenges in studies where participants may have more than one treatment attempt. We conclude by highlighting the importance of collaboration between clinical and methodological experts, as well as people with experience of fertility problems.

Validation of the Surrogate Threshold Effect for Change in Bone Mineral Density as a Surrogate Endpoint for Fracture Outcomes: The FNIH-ASBMR SABRE Project

The surrogate threshold effect (STE) is defined as the minimum treatment effect on a surrogate that is reliably predictive of a treatment effect on the clinical outcome. It provides a framework for implementing a clinical trial with a surrogate endpoint. The aim of this study was to update our previous analysis by validating the STE for change in total hip (TH) BMD as a surrogate for fracture risk reduction; the novelty of this study was this validation. To do so, we used individual patient data from 61,415 participants in 16 RCTs that evaluated bisphosphonates (nine trials), selective estrogen receptor modulators (four trials), denosumab (one trial), odanacatib (one trial), and teriparatide (one trial) to estimate trial-specific treatment effects on TH BMD and all, vertebral, hip, and nonvertebral fractures. We then conducted a random effects meta-regression of the log relative fracture risk reduction against 24-month change in TH BMD, and computed the STE as the intersection of the upper 95% prediction limit of this regression with the line of no fracture reduction. We validated the STE by checking whether the number of fractures in each trial provided 80% power and determining what proportion of trials with BMD changes ≥ STE reported significant reductions in fracture risk. We applied this analysis to (i) the trials on which we estimated the STE; and (ii) trials on which we did not estimate the STE. We found that the STEs for all, vertebral, hip, and nonvertebral fractures were 1.83%, 1.42%, 3.18%, and 2.13%, respectively. Among trials used to estimate STE, 27 of 28 were adequately powered, showed BMD effects exceeding the STE, and showed significant reductions in fracture risk. Among the validation set of 11 trials, 10 met these criteria. Thus STE differs by fracture type and has been validated in trials not used to develop the approach. © 2021 The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR).

Oncology drugs and added benefit: insights from 3 European health technology assessment agencies on the role of efficacy endpoints

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to understand the impact of different efficacy endpoints on reimbursement decisions made by health technology assessment (HTA) bodies.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

European Medicines Agency (EMA) oncology product marketing authorizations were screened to identify products that completed review by 3 HTA bodies during 2016-2019: United Kingdom's National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, Germany's Gemeinsamer Bundesausschuss, and France's Haute Autorité de Santé. Each decision's endpoint information, including overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), was extracted. Each endpoint's influence on added benefits rating (the degree of added benefit as judged by the HTA agency) and full reimbursement (i.e. reimbursed population to label) decisions was tested using bivariate analyses.

RESULTS

An increasing trend was observed toward HTA submissions with immature OS data (36.8% and 71.4% in 2016 and 2019, respectively), which was a predictor of limited added benefit (p < .001). Regarding data availability, 63% of submissions provided OS, 2% provided PFS without OS; and 35% provided neither. OS availability significantly influenced added benefit (p < .001) but not full reimbursement (p > .05) decisions, whereas PFS without OS had no significant impact compared with either OS or PFS data for either outcome (p = .99).

CONCLUSIONS

The trend toward fewer products filing mature OS data over time suggests sponsors may be increasingly confident achieving reimbursement with surrogate endpoint data, although mature OS data provided the strongest correlation to positive reimbursement decisions. Notably, in some locally advanced settings, OS data maturity will take a long time to obtain. To expedite patient access to new medicines, payers should consider the acceptance of surrogate endpoints predictive of clinical benefit.

Glycated hemoglobin as a surrogate for evaluating the effectiveness of drugs in diabetes mellitus trials: a systematic review and trial-level meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to investigate whether glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) is a valid surrogate for evaluating the effectiveness of antihyperglycemic drugs in diabetes mellitus (DM) trials.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of placebo-controlled randomized clinical trials (RCTs) evaluating the effect of a treatment on HbA1c (mean difference between groups) and clinical outcomes (relative risk of mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, heart failure, and/or kidney injury) in patients with DM. Then, we investigated the association between treatment effects on HbA1c and clinical outcomes using regression analysis at the trial level. Lastly, we interpreted the correlation coefficients (R) using the cut-off points suggested by the Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Healthcare (IQWiG). HbA1c was considered a valid surrogate if it demonstrated a strong association: lower limit of the 95 percent confidence interval (95 percent CI) of R greater than or equal to .85.

RESULTS

Nineteen RCTs were identified. All studies included adults with type 2 DM. None of the associations evaluated was strong enough to validate HbA1c as a surrogate for any clinical outcome: mortality (R = .34; 95 percent CI -.14 to .69), myocardial infarction (R = .20; -.30 to .61), heart failure (R = .08; -.40 to .53), kidney injury (R = -.04; -.52 to .47), and stroke (R = .81; .54 to .93).

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence from multiple placebo-controlled RCTs does not support the use of HbA1c as a surrogate to measure the effectiveness of antihyperglycemic drugs in DM studies.

Access and pricing of medicines for patients with rare diseases in the European Union: an industry perspective

INTRODUCTION

The EU Orphan Regulation has successfully stimulated R&D of medicines for rare diseases, resulting in substantial increase of orphan designations and authorized orphan medicinal products in the EU during the last decade. Despite such important advances, access to treatment across the 27 EU Member States is still highly variable.

AREAS COVERED

We provide an overview of the current situation of patient access to orphan drugs in the EU. We discuss the EU policy landscape regarding joint assessment and pricing & reimbursement negotiations of medicinal products, price and sustainability of orphan drugs for health care systems and the importance of Real-World Data and registry infrastructures for rare diseases. Additionally, we provide recommendations for areas of improvement throughout the lifecycle of orphan drugs, aiming to preserve a positive R&D climate for rare diseases in the EU and accelerate patient access.

EXPERT OPINION

The EU needs to maintain a strong patient-centric pharmaceutical ecosystem that encourages long-term investments and rewards innovation in areas of high unmet medical need. Areas of potential improvement range from enhanced alignment of regulatory and HTA evidence requirements and use of specific value frameworks for the assessment of orphan drugs to the development of registry infrastructures and innovative performance-based pricing agreements.

Current landscape of clinical development and approval of advanced therapies

Advanced therapy medicinal products (ATMPs) are innovative therapies that mainly target orphan diseases and high unmet medical needs. The uncertainty about the product's benefit-risk balance at the time of approval, the limitations of nonclinical development, and the complex quality aspects of those highly individualized advanced therapies are playing a key role in the clinical development, approval, and post-marketing setting for these therapies. This article reviews the current landscape of clinical development of advanced therapies, its challenges, and some of the efforts several stakeholders are conducting to move forward within this field. Progressive iteration of the science, methodologically sound clinical developments, establishing new standards for ATMPs development with the aim to ensure consistency in clinical development, and the reproducibility of knowledge is required, not only to increase the evidence generation for approval but to set principles to achieve translational success in this field.

Coverage and Pricing Recommendations of the French National Health Authority for Innovative Drugs: A Retrospective Analysis From 2014 to 2020

OBJECTIVES

This study provides a retrospective analysis of the recommendations of the French National Health Authority on the reimbursement and pricing of innovative drugs.

METHODS

The analysis includes drugs subjected to both economic and clinical evaluations in France from 2014 to 2020. Ordered logistic and quantile regressions are used to estimate the factors associated with the clinical value (SMR), the clinical added value (ASMR), and the incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) of innovative drugs. All variables used in the regression analyses are extracted from the Clinical and Economic Opinions for the 146 observations.

RESULTS

Regression analyses indicate that 2 of the 5 official criteria, the efficacy-adverse events balance of the drug and its function, are significantly associated with the SMR rating. The ASMR is positively associated with the disease severity, the quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gain provided by the drug, and the validation of the ICUR in the Economic Opinion. At the first quartile of the ICUR distribution (approximately €50 000/QALY), higher ICUR levels are observed for drugs with a smaller target population and for drugs claimed as more innovative. Higher ICUR levels are also observed for pediatric drugs and for drugs with no therapeutic alternative at the third quartile of the distribution (approximately €240 000/QALY).

CONCLUSIONS

Not all official criteria of the SMR are associated with actual ratings obtained. Regarding the ASMR, the results support the idea of a convergence between the 2 independent clinical and economic appraisal processes. Finally, the factors influencing the ICUR level vary across the distribution of ICUR.

Assessment of Nonfatal Myocardial Infarction as a Surrogate for All-Cause and Cardiovascular Mortality in Treatment or Prevention of Coronary Artery Disease: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

IMPORTANCE

Although nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI) is associated with an increased risk of mortality, evidence validating nonfatal MI as a surrogate end point for all-cause or cardiovascular (CV) mortality is lacking.

OBJECTIVE

To examine whether nonfatal MI may be a surrogate for all-cause or CV mortality in patients with or at risk for coronary artery disease.

DATA SOURCES

In this meta-analysis, PubMed was searched from inception until December 31, 2020, for randomized clinical trials of interventions to treat or prevent coronary artery disease reporting mortality and nonfatal MI published in 3 leading journals.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized clinical trials including at least 1000 patients with 24 months of follow-up.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Trial-level correlations between nonfatal MI and all-cause or CV mortality were assessed for surrogacy using the coefficient of determination (R2). The criterion for surrogacy was set at 0.8. Subgroup analyses based on study subject (primary prevention, secondary prevention, mixed primary and secondary prevention, and revascularization), era of trial (before 2000, 2000-2009, and 2010 and after), and follow-up duration (2.0-3.9, 4.0-5.9, and ≥6.0 years) were performed.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

All-cause or CV mortality and nonfatal MI.

RESULTS

A total of 144 articles randomizing 1 211 897 patients met the criteria for inclusion. Nonfatal MI did not meet the threshold for surrogacy for all-cause (R2 = 0.02; 95% CI, 0.00-0.08) or CV (R2 = 0.11; 95% CI, 0.02-0.27) mortality. Nonfatal MI was not a surrogate for all-cause mortality in primary (R2 = 0.01; 95% CI, 0.001-0.26), secondary (R2 = 0.03; 95% CI, 0.00-0.20), mixed primary and secondary prevention (R2 = 0.001; 95% CI, 0.00-0.08), or revascularization trials (R2 = 0.21; 95% CI, 0.002-0.50). For trials enrolling patients before 2000 (R2 = 0.22; 95% CI, 0.08-0.36), between 2000 and 2009 (R2 = 0.02; 95% CI, 0.00-0.17), and from 2010 and after (R2 = 0.01; 95% CI, 0.00-0.09), nonfatal MI was not a surrogate for all-cause mortality. Nonfatal MI was not a surrogate for all-cause mortality in randomized clinical trials with 2.0 to 3.9 (R2 = 0.004; 95% CI, 0.00-0.08), 4.0 to 5.9 (R2 = 0.06; 95% CI, 0.001-0.16), or 6.0 or more years of follow-up (R2 = 0.30; 95% CI, 0.01-0.55).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The findings of this meta-analysis do not appear to establish nonfatal MI as a surrogate for all-cause or CV mortality in randomized clinical trials of interventions to treat or prevent coronary artery disease.

The Impasse on Overall Survival in Oncology Reimbursement Decision-Making: How Can We Resolve This?

Mature overall survival (OS) data are often unavailable at the time of regulatory and reimbursement decisions for a new cancer treatment. For patients with early-stage cancers treated with potentially curative treatments, demonstrating an OS benefit may take years and may be confounded by subsequent lines of therapy or crossover to the investigational treatment. For patients with advanced-stage cancers, mature OS data may be available but difficult to interpret for similar reasons. There are strong opinions about approval and reimbursement in the absence of mature OS data, with concerns over delay in patient access set against concerns about uncertainty in long-term benefit. This position paper reflects our individual views as patient advocate, clinician or health economist on one aspect of this debate. We look at payer decisions in the absence of mature OS data, considering when and how non-OS trial outcomes could inform decision-making and how uncertainty can be addressed beyond the trial, supporting these views with evidence from the literature. We consider when it is reasonable for payers to expect or not expect mature OS data at the initial reimbursement decision (based on criteria such as cancer stage and treatment efficacy) acknowledging that there are settings in which mature OS data are expected. We propose flexible strategies for generating and appraising patient-relevant evidence, including context-relevant endpoints and quality of life measures, when survival rates are good and mature OS data are not expected. We note that fair reimbursement is important; this means valuing patient benefit as shown through prespecified endpoints and reappraising if there is ongoing uncertainty or failure to show a sustained benefit. We suggest that reimbursement systems continue to evolve to align with scientific advances, because innovation is only meaningful if readily accessible to patients. The proposed strategies have the potential to promote thorough assessment of potential benefit to patients and lead to timely access to effective medicines.