Estimands for overall survival in clinical trials with treatment switching in oncology

被引:14
作者
Manitz, Juliane [1 ]
Kan-Dobrosky, Natalia [2 ]
Buchner, Hannes [3 ]
Casadebaig, Marie-Laure [4 ]
Degtyarev, Evgeny [5 ]
Dey, Jyotirmoy [6 ]
Haddad, Vincent [7 ]
Jie, Fei [8 ]
Martin, Emily [1 ]
Mo, Mindy [9 ]
Rufibach, Kaspar [10 ]
Shentu, Yue [11 ]
Stalbovskaya, Viktoriya [12 ]
Tang, Rui [13 ]
Yung, Godwin [14 ]
Zhou, Jiangxiu [15 ]
机构
[1] EMD Serono, Global Biostat, Billerica, MA USA
[2] PPD, Stat Sci, Wilmington, NC USA
[3] Stabur GmbH, Biostat & Data Sci, Munich, Germany
[4] BMS, GBDS, Boudry, Switzerland
[5] Novartis, Clin Dev & Analyt, Basel, Switzerland
[6] AbbVie Inc, Data & Stat Sci, N Chicago, IL USA
[7] AstraZeneca, Oncol Biometr, Cambridge, England
[8] Daiichi Sankyo Inc, Biostat & Data Management, Basking Ridge, NJ USA
[9] Bayer, Oncol Clin Stat US, Whippany, NJ USA
[10] F Hoffmann La Roche Ltd, Methods Collaborat & Outreach, Basel, Switzerland
[11] Merck & Co Inc, Biostat & Res Decis Sci, Kenilworth, NJ USA
[12] Merus, Clin Dev, Utrecht, Netherlands
[13] Servier Pharmaceut, Global Biometr, Boston, MA USA
[14] Genentech Inc, Methods Collaborat & Outreach, 460 Point San Bruno Blvd, San Francisco, CA 94080 USA
[15] GSK, Biostat, Collegeville, PA USA
关键词
cross-over; estimand; ITT; overall survival; treatment switching; PROGRESSION-FREE SURVIVAL; PHASE-III; OPEN-LABEL; NONCOMPLIANCE;
D O I
10.1002/pst.2158
中图分类号
R9 [药学];
学科分类号
1007 ;
摘要
An addendum of the ICH E9 guideline on Statistical Principles for Clinical Trials was released in November 2019 introducing the estimand framework. This new framework aims to align trial objectives and statistical analyses by requiring a precise definition of the inferential quantity of interest, that is, the estimand. This definition explicitly accounts for intercurrent events, such as switching to new anticancer therapies for the analysis of overall survival (OS), the gold standard in oncology. Traditionally, OS in confirmatory studies is analyzed using the intention-to-treat (ITT) approach comparing treatment groups as they were initially randomized regardless of whether treatment switching occurred and regardless of any subsequent therapy (treatment-policy strategy). Regulatory authorities and other stakeholders often consider ITT results as most relevant. However, the respective estimand only yields a clinically meaningful comparison of two treatment arms if subsequent therapies are already approved and reflect clinical practice. We illustrate different scenarios where subsequent therapies are not yet approved drugs and thus do not reflect clinical practice. In such situations the hypothetical strategy could be more meaningful from patient's and prescriber's perspective. The cross-industry Oncology Estimand Working Group () was initiated to foster a common understanding and consistent implementation of the estimand framework in oncology clinical trials. This paper summarizes the group's recommendations for appropriate estimands in the presence of treatment switching, one of the key intercurrent events in oncology clinical trials. We also discuss how different choices of estimands may impact study design, data collection, trial conduct, analysis, and interpretation.
引用
收藏
页码:150 / 162
页数:13
相关论文
共 36 条
  • [11] European Medicines Agency, QUEST ANSW ADJ CROSS
  • [12] Issues in Using Progression-Free Survival When Evaluating Oncology Products
    Fleming, Thomas R.
    Rothmann, Mark D.
    Lu, Hong Laura
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2009, 27 (17) : 2874 - 2880
  • [13] Marginal structural models to estimate the causal effect of zidovudine on the survival of HIV-positive men
    Hernán, MA
    Brumback, B
    Robins, JM
    [J]. EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2000, 11 (05) : 561 - 570
  • [14] Bevacizumab Plus Irinotecan Versus Temozolomide in Newly Diagnosed O6-Methylguanine-DNA Methyltransferase Nonmethylated Glioblastoma: The Randomized GLARIUS Trial
    Herrlinger, Ulrich
    Schaefer, Niklas
    Steinbach, Joachim P.
    Weyerbrock, Astrid
    Hau, Peter
    Goldbrunner, Roland
    Friedrich, Franziska
    Rohde, Veit
    Ringel, Florian
    Schlegel, Uwe
    Sabel, Michael
    Ronellenfitsch, Michael W.
    Uhl, Martin
    Maciaczyk, Jaroslaw
    Grau, Stefan
    Schnell, Oliver
    Haenel, Mathias
    Krex, Dietmar
    Vajkoczy, Peter
    Gerlach, Ruediger
    Kortmann, Rolf-Dieter
    Mehdorn, Maximilian
    Tuettenberg, Jochen
    Mayer-Steinacker, Regine
    Fietkau, Rainer
    Brehmer, Stefanie
    Mack, Frederic
    Stuplich, Moritz
    Kebir, Sied
    Kohnen, Ralf
    Dunkl, Elmar
    Leutgeb, Barbara
    Proescholdt, Martin
    Pietsch, Torsten
    Urbach, Horst
    Belka, Claus
    Stummer, Walter
    Glas, Martin
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2016, 34 (14) : 1611 - U134
  • [15] Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG Germany), 2016, IBR BEN ASS ACC 35A
  • [16] Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG Germany), BEN ASS
  • [17] Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG Germany), IBR IMBR TREATM CHRO
  • [18] International Council for Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Human Use (ICH), E9 R1 ADD EST SENS A
  • [19] Overall Survival in Patients With Advanced Melanoma Who Received Nivolumab Versus Investigator's Choice Chemotherapy in CheckMate 037: A Randomized, Controlled, Open-Label Phase III Trial
    Larkin, James
    Minor, David
    D'Angelo, Sandra
    Neyns, Bart
    Smylie, Michael
    Miller, Wilson H., Jr.
    Gutzmer, Ralf
    Linette, Gerald
    Chmielowski, Bartosz
    Lao, Christopher D.
    Lorigan, Paul
    Grossmann, Kenneth
    Hassel, Jessica C.
    Sznol, Mario
    Daud, Adil
    Sosman, Jeffrey
    Khushalani, Nikhil
    Schadendorf, Dirk
    Hoeller, Christoph
    Walker, Dana
    Kong, George
    Horak, Christine
    Weber, Jeffrey
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2018, 36 (04) : 383 - +
  • [20] Improved two-stage estimation to adjust for treatment switching in randomised trials: g-estimation to address time-dependent confounding
    Latimer, N. R.
    White, I. R.
    Tilling, K.
    Siebert, U.
    [J]. STATISTICAL METHODS IN MEDICAL RESEARCH, 2020, 29 (10) : 2900 - 2918