Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32410591›Full record

SynthesisBMC cancer2020

Disease-free survival as a surrogate endpoint for overall survival in adjuvant trials of pancreatic cancer: a meta-analysis of 20 randomized controlled trials.

Run-Cong Nie, Xue-Bin Zou, Shu-Qiang Yuan, Ying-Bo Chen, Shi Chen, Yong-Ming Chen, Guo-Ming Chen, Xiao-Jiang Chen, Tian-Qi Luo, Shu-Man Li and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC cancer, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Does Treatment of Jaundice Matter before Pancreaticoduodenectomy? Results from an International Multicentre Recurrence after Whipple (RAW) Study.European surgical research. Europaische chirurgische Forschung. Recherches chirurgicales europeennes · 2026
    Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
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

13 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Run-Cong NieDepartment of Gastric Surgery, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, China.
Xue-Bin ZouDepartment of Ultrasound, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, China.
Shu-Qiang YuanDepartment of Gastric Surgery, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, China.
Ying-Bo ChenDepartment of Gastric Surgery, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, China.
Shi ChenDepartment of Gastric Surgery, The 6th Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China.
Yong-Ming ChenDepartment of Gastric Surgery, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, China.
Guo-Ming ChenDepartment of Gastric Surgery, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, China.
Xiao-Jiang ChenDepartment of Gastric Surgery, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, China.
Tian-Qi LuoDepartment of Gastric Surgery, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, China.
Shu-Man LiDepartment of Experimental Research (Cancer Institute), Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, China.
Jin-Ling DuanDepartment of Experimental Research (Cancer Institute), Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, China.
Yun WangDepartment of Hematologic Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, No. 651 Dongfeng Eastern Road, Guangzhou, 510060, Guangdong, China. wangyun@sysucc.org.cn.
Yuan-Fang LiDepartment of Gastric Surgery, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, China. liyuanf@sysucc.org.cn.
Sun Yat-sen University · CNState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South ChinaSun Yat-sen University Cancer Center · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWe aimed to assess whether disease-free survival (DFS) could serve as a reliable surrogate endpoint for overall survival (OS) in adjuvant trials of pancreatic cancer.

methodsWe systematically reviewed adjuvant randomized trials for non-metastatic pancreatic cancer after curative resection that reported a hazard ratio (HR) for DFS and OS. We assessed the correlation between treatment effect (HR) on DFS and OS, weighted by sample size or precision of hazard ratio estimate, assuming fixed and random effects, and calculated the surrogate threshold effect (STE). We also performed sensitivity analyses and a leave-one-out cross validation approach to evaluate the robustness of our findings.

resultsAfter screening 450 relevant articles, we identified a total of 20 qualifying trails comprising 5170 patients for quantitative analysis. We noted a strong correlation between the treatment effects for DFS and OS, with coefficient of determination of 0.82 in the random effect model, 0.82 in the fixed effect model, and 0.80 in the sample size weighting; the robustness of this finding was further verified by the leave-one-out cross-validation approach. Sensitivity analyses with restriction to phase 3 trials, large trials, trials with mature follow-up periods, and trials with adjuvant therapy versus adjuvant therapy strengthened the correlation (0.75 to 0.88) between DFS and OS. The STE was 0.96 for DFS.

conclusionsTherefore, DFS could be regarded as a surrogate endpoint for OS in adjuvant trials of pancreatic cancer. In future similar adjuvant trials, a hazard ratio for DFS of 0.96 or less would predict a treatment impact on OS.

Indexed as

BiomarkersBiomarkers, TumorChemotherapy, AdjuvantHumansPancreatic NeoplasmsPrognosisRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSurvival RateBiomarkersBiomarkers, TumorDisease-free survivalOverall survivalPancreatic cancerSurrogate

Identifiers

PMID32410591
PMCPMC7227225
OpenAlexW3024263816

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.