ArticleJournal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology2015
Resampling the N9741 trial to compare tumor dynamic versus conventional end points in randomized phase II trials.
Article in Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Correlations of survival with progression-free survival, response rate, and disease control rate in advanced biliary tract cancer: a meta-analysis of randomised trials of first-line chemotherapy.British journal of cancer · 2016Pooled it
- Overall response rate, progression-free survival, and overall survival with targeted and standard therapies in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: US Food and Drug Administration trial-level and patient-level analyses.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2015Pooled it
- Tumor Dynamic Model-Based Decision Support for Phase Ib/II Combination Studies: A Retrospective Assessment Based on Resampling of the Phase III Study IMpower150.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2023Trial
- Clinical Utility of Metrics Based on Tumor Measurements in Phase II Trials to Predict Overall Survival Outcomes in Phase III Trials by Using Resampling Methods.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2015Trial
- Modeling tumor measurement data to predict overall survival (OS) in cancer clinical trials.Contemporary clinical trials communications · 2021Article
- On the relationship between tumour growth rate and survival in non-small cell lung cancer.PeerJ · 2017Article
- Modeling and simulation of maintenance treatment in first-line non-small cell lung cancer with external validation.BMC cancer · 2016Article
- The power of phase II end-points for different possible mechanisms of action of an experimental treatment.European journal of cancer (Oxford, England : 1990) · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe optimal end point for randomized phase II trials of anticancer therapies remains controversial. We simulated phase II trials by resampling patients from N9741, a randomized phase III trial of chemotherapy regimens for metastatic colorectal cancer, and compared the power of various end points to detect the superior therapy (FOLFOX [infusional fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin] had longer overall survival than both IROX [irinotecan plus oxaliplatin] and IFL [irinotecan and bolus fluorouracil plus leucovorin]).
methodsTumor measurements and progression-free survival (PFS) data were obtained for 1,471 patients; 1,002 had consistently measured tumors and were resampled (5,000 replicates) to simulate two-arm, randomized phase II trials with α = 0.10 (one sided) and 20 to 80 patients per arm. End points included log ratio of tumor size at 6, 12, and 18 weeks relative to baseline; time to tumor growth (TTG), estimated using a nonlinear mixed-effects model; and PFS. Arms were compared using rank sum tests for log ratio and TTG and a log-rank test for PFS.
resultsFor FOLFOX versus IFL, TTG and PFS had similar power, with both exceeding the power of log ratio at 18 weeks; for FOLFOX versus IROX, TTG and log ratio at 18 weeks had similar power, with both exceeding the power of PFS. The best end points exhibited > 80% power with 60 to 80 patients per arm.
conclusionTTG is a powerful end point for randomized phase II trials of cytotoxic therapies in metastatic colorectal cancer; it was either comparable or superior to PFS and log ratio at 18 weeks. Additional studies will be needed to clarify the potential of TTG as a phase II end point.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.