Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30035644›Full record

ArticleClinical trials (London, England)2018

Application of multi-state models in cancer clinical trials.

Jennifer G Le-Rademacher, Ryan A Peterson, Terry M Therneau, Ben L Sanford, Richard M Stone, Sumithra J Mandrekar

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical trials (London, England), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

26 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Jennifer G Le-Rademacher1 Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-2234-7430
Ryan A Peterson1 Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-4650-5798
Terry M Therneau1 Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Ben L Sanford3 ICON Clinical Research, Durham, NC, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-2800-6319
Richard M Stone4 Department of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA.
Sumithra J Mandrekar1 Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.

Funding

Member Site CoreU10CA180821 · NCI · BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL · PI Evanthia Galanis · 2014 to 2026
$177.3M
NCI NIH HHS U10 CA180821
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background/aims The goal of this article is to illustrate the utility of multi-state models in cancer clinical trials. Our specific aims are to describe multi-state models and how they differ from standard survival methods, to illustrate how multi-state models can facilitate deeper understanding of the treatment effect on multiple paths along the disease process that patients could experience in cancer clinical trials, to explain the differences between multi-state models and time-dependent Cox models, and to briefly describe available software to conduct such analyses. Methods Data from 717 newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia patients who enrolled in the CALGB 10603 trial were used as an illustrative example. The current probability-in-state was estimated using the Aalen-Johansen estimator. The restricted mean time in state was calculated as the area under the probability-in-state curves. Cox-type regression was used to evaluate the effect of midostaurin on the various clinical paths. Simulation was conducted using a newly constructed shiny application. All analyses were performed using the R software. Results Multi-state model analyses of CALGB 10603 suggested that the overall improvement in survival with midostaurin seen in the primary analysis possibly resulted from a higher complete remission rate in combination with a lower risk of relapse and of death after complete remission in patients treated with midostaurin. Simulation results, in a three-state illness-death without recovery model, demonstrate that multi-state models and time-dependent Cox models evaluate treatment effects from different frameworks. Conclusion Multi-state models allow detailed evaluation of treatment effects in complex clinical trial settings where patients can experience multiple paths between study enrollment and the final outcome. Multi-state models can be used as a complementary tool to standard survival analyses to provide deeper insights to the effects of treatment in trial settings with complex disease process.

Indexed as

Leukemia, Myeloid, AcuteRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAntineoplastic AgentsDisease-Free SurvivalHumansModels, StatisticalProportional Hazards ModelsRemission InductionStatistics, NonparametricStaurosporineSurvival AnalysisAntineoplastic AgentsmidostaurinStaurosporinecancerclinical trialsMulti-state modelsurvival analysistime-to-event data

Identifiers

PMID30035644
PMCPMC6133743

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.