• Gynecologic oncology · Jan 2015

    Review

    Contemporary phase III clinical trial endpoints in advanced ovarian cancer: assessing the pros and cons of objective response rate, progression-free survival, and overall survival.

    • J Tate Thigpen.
    • Division of Hematology and Oncology, University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, MS, USA. Electronic address: jtthigpen@att.net.
    • Gynecol. Oncol. 2015 Jan 1;136(1):121-9.

    AbstractAmong gynecologic cancers, ovarian cancer provides the greatest challenge because 75% to 80% of patients present with stage III/IV disease. Over the last 40 years, a series of large trials conducted by the Gynecologic Oncology Group and other cooperative groups has produced striking improvements in patient outcome; but the majority still dies of their disease. Further research in both the laboratory and the clinic is essential to continued improvement in patient management. Clinical trials, however, have become a major challenge because of issues with trial endpoints. Historically, overall survival (OS) has been regarded as the "gold standard" of endpoints. Lack of effective treatment for patients who progressed on or recurred after front-line therapy allowed trials to avoid obfuscation of OS by post-progression therapy. More recently, studies have identified over 20 agents active against ovarian cancer. Reasonable evidence shows that effective post-progression therapy with multiple lines of active agents can render the survival endpoint uninterpretable. Two other endpoints avoid this problem. The objective response rate, assessed by the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST), is an accepted endpoint for accelerated approval in ovarian cancer. More importantly, progression-free survival (PFS), measured from study entry to progression of disease, avoids post-progression therapy completely. Without effective post-progression therapy (prior to 1990), data show that PFS is a surrogate for OS. Recent experience with 4 large trials of bevacizumab shows that PFS can be accurately assessed if progression is clearly defined and if timing of assessments is consistent in all study arms. Acceptance of PFS as the optimal endpoint for ovarian cancer trials by investigators and regulatory agencies is crucial to further advances in management because effective post-progression therapy has rendered differences in OS virtually impossible to assess reliably.Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

Want more great medical articles?

Keep up to date with a free trial of metajournal, personalized for your practice.
1,624,503 articles already indexed!

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.