SynthesisInternational journal of colorectal disease2012
Meta-analysis of the association between progression-free survival and overall survival in metastatic colorectal cancer.
Synthesis in International journal of colorectal disease, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Clinical Outcomes and Effectiveness of CRLX101 for Solid Tumors: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Current medicinal chemistry · 2025Pooled it
- Factors affecting the association between overall survival and progression-free survival in clinical trials of first-line treatment for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2014Pooled it
- S-1-based chemotherapy versus capecitabine-based chemotherapy as first-line treatment for advanced gastric carcinoma: a meta-analysis.PloS one · 2013Pooled it
- Survival of Cancer Patients Treated with Non-Fermented Mistletoe Extract: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Integrative cancer therapiesPooled it
- A framework to evaluate surrogate endpoints at the trial level: analysis in colorectal cancer.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2026Article
- Bayesian parametric estimation based on left-truncated competing risks data under bivariate Clayton copula models.Journal of applied statistics · 2024Article
- Bayesian hierarchical meta-analytic methods for modeling surrogate relationships that vary across treatment classes using aggregate data.Statistics in medicine · 2020Article
- A Systematic Review and Recommendation for Reporting of Surrogate Endpoint Evaluation Using Meta-analyses.JNCI cancer spectrum · 2019Review
- Meta-regression of treatments for metastatic colorectal cancer: Quantifying incremental benefit from 2000 to 2012.World journal of clinical oncology · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe validity of progression-free survival (PFS) as a surrogate endpoint for overall survival (OS) in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) trials has been studied, primarily in first-line treatment. The relationship between PFS and OS has not been well studied in later lines of treatment.
methodsWe conducted a systematic literature review of mCRC phase 2 and 3 clinical trials that reported OS and PFS (or time-to-progression [TTP]) data. Correlation between endpoints (either PFS alone or PFS aggregated with TTP [PFS_TTP]) was estimated within treatment arms. Treatment effect was the ratio of the median time to OS, PFS, or PFS_TTP in the "control" versus "experimental" arm. We conducted meta-regression analyses and performed receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) analysis.
resultsWe analyzed data from 62 articles (23,527 patients). A high positive correlation was found between median PFS_TTP and median OS within treatment arms (r = 0.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.82-0.91) and also between the median OS and median PFS (r = 0.89, 95% CI, 0.83-0.93)]. R(2) was 0.48 for PFS_TTP and 0.59 for PFS; R (2) for PFS_TTP was higher for first-line (R(2) = 0.54) than second-line studies (R(2) = 0.38). The ROC analysis is presented as a conceptual tool for evaluating the performance of PFS as a surrogate for OS at various thresholds.
conclusionsThe correlation of PFS, alone or aggregated with TTP, with OS in clinical trials of patients with mCRC is robust across lines of therapy and provides a useful means of predicting improvements in OS using PFS data.
Indexed as
Identifiers
22076612What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.