Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31135822›Full record

ReviewJAMA internal medicine2019

An Overview of Cancer Drugs Approved by the US Food and Drug Administration Based on the Surrogate End Point of Response Rate.

Emerson Y Chen, Vikram Raghunathan, Vinay Prasad

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in JAMA internal medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 73 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
73citing papers in PubMed, 9 pooled it
–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

73 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Objective Response Predicts Survival in Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma Treated with Systemic Therapies.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2022
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Clinical Benefit and Global Regulation of Bispecific Antibody Drugs: A Cross-sectional Analysis.BioDrugs : clinical immunotherapeutics, biopharmaceuticals and gene therapy · 2026
    Article
  19. Review
  20. Review

13 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Emerson Y ChenDivision of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Knight Cancer Institute, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland.
Vikram RaghunathanDivision of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Knight Cancer Institute, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland.
Vinay PrasadDivision of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Knight Cancer Institute, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Approximately one-third of cancer drugs are approved based on response rate (RR)-the percentage of patients whose tumors shrink beyond an arbitrary threshold-typically assessed in a single-arm study. Objective: To characterize RR end points used by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for cancer drug approval. Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective review of FDA-approved drug indications in oncology from 2006 to 2018. Exposures: Data related to cancer type, line of therapy (first-line, second-line, or third-or-later-line treatment for advanced/metastatic disease), type of FDA approval pathway, trial design, sample size, and level of innovation were extracted. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the RR used as the basis for FDA approval. The secondary outcome was rate of complete response. Results: Eighty-five indications for 59 cancer drugs were identified, 32 (38%) received regular approval, and 53 (62%) were granted accelerated approval. Twenty-nine (55%) accelerated approvals were later converted to regular approval. Of these, 6 (21%) approvals showed overall survival benefit, 16 (55%) later established progression-free survival benefit, and 7 (24%) continued to use RR but gained regular approval. The median RR among the 85 indications was 41% (interquartile range [IQR], 27%-58%). Among them, 14 of 85 (16%) had an RR less than 20%, 28 of 85 (33%) had an RR less than 30%, and 40 of 85 (47%) had an RR less than 40%. The median complete RR for 81 participants was 6% (IQR, 2%-22%). The median sample size among studies leading to approval was 117 (IQR, 76-182; range, 18-1052 participants). Drugs with accelerated approval pending confirmatory data had lower RR compared with drugs that have completed most postmarketing efficacy requirements (median, 28%; IQR, 15%-50% vs median, 42%; IQR, 31%-58%; P = .02). Conclusions and Relevance: Many cancer drugs approved on the basis of response rate offer numerically low or modest response rates. Most premarket studies accrue more than 100 patients. Some of these drugs could potentially be tested in premarket randomized clinical trials measuring directly end points that demonstrate clinical benefit.

Indexed as

Antineoplastic AgentsBiomarkersDrug ApprovalHumansNeoplasmsUnited StatesUnited States Food and Drug AdministrationAntineoplastic AgentsBiomarkers

Identifiers

PMID31135822
PMCPMC6547222

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.