The lancet oncology
-
Opportunities to decrease the toxicity and cost of approved treatment regimens with lower dose, less frequent, or shorter duration alternative regimens have been limited by the perception that alternatives must be non-inferior to approved regimens. Non-inferiority trials are large and expensive to do, because they must show statistically that the alternative and approved therapies differ in a single outcome, by a margin far smaller than that required to demonstrate superiority. Non-inferiority's flaws are manifest: it ignores variability expected to occur with repeated evaluation of the approved therapy, fails to recognise that a trial of similar design will be labelled as superiority or non-inferiority depending on whether it is done prior to or after initial registration of the approved treatment, and relegates endpoints such as toxicity and cost. ⋯ This situation is the tyranny of the non-inferiority trial: its statistics perpetuate less cost-effective regimens, which are not patient-centred, even when less intensive therapies confer survival benefits nearly identical to those of the standard, by placing a disproportionately large burden of proof on the alternative. This approach is illogical. We propose that the designation of trials as superiority or non-inferiority be abandoned, and that randomised, controlled trials should henceforth be described simply as "comparative".
-
The lancet oncology · Oct 2024
Meta AnalysisEfficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors for individuals with advanced EGFR-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer who progressed on EGFR tyrosine-kinase inhibitors: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and network meta-analysis.
The clinical benefits of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based treatments in treating individuals with advanced EGFR-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who have progressed on EGFR tyrosine-kinase inhibitors (TKIs) remain controversial. We aimed to review the literature to comprehensively investigate the individual and comparative clinical outcomes of various ICI-based treatment strategies in this population. ⋯ None.
-
The lancet oncology · Oct 2024
ReviewChallenges and opportunities for early phase clinical trials of novel drug-radiotherapy combinations: recommendations from NRG Oncology, the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO), the American College of Radiology (ACR), the Sarah Cannon Research Institute, and the American College of Radiation Oncology (ACRO).
NRG Oncology's Developmental Therapeutics and Radiation Therapy Subcommittee assembled an interdisciplinary group of investigators to address barriers to successful early phase clinical trials of novel combination therapies involving radiation. This Policy Review elucidates some of the many challenges associated with study design for early phase trials combining radiotherapy with novel systemic agents, which are distinct from drug-drug combination development and are often overlooked. We also advocate for potential solutions that could mitigate or eliminate some of these barriers, providing examples of specific clinical trial designs that could help facilitate efficient and effective evaluation of novel drug-radiotherapy combinations.
-
Patients with brain tumours are motivated to participate in clinical trials involving repeat tissue sampling. Normalising the use of neoadjuvant and staged surgical trials necessitates collaboration among patients, regulatory agencies, and researchers. Initial and repetitive tissue sampling plays a crucial role in enhancing our understanding of resistance mechanisms and vulnerabilities in brain tumour therapy. ⋯ Although liquid biopsy technologies hold promise, they are not yet ready to replace tissue analysis. Clear communication about the risks and benefits of biopsies is essential, particularly regarding potential postoperative deficits. Changes in mindset and neurosurgical culture are imperative to achieve much needed breakthroughs in the development of new, effective therapies for brain tumours.
-
The lancet oncology · Oct 2024
ReviewDevelopment of a conceptual framework for an electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) system measuring symptoms and impacts of CAR T-cell therapies in patients with haematological malignancies.
Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy is associated with potentially severe toxicities that create a substantial burden for patients. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) offer valuable insights into symptoms, functioning, and other complex constructs of interest. In this Review, we aimed to identify symptom and impact concepts important to patients receiving CAR T-cell therapy, construct a conceptual framework for an electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) system, and identify timepoints to capture PRO data for CAR T-cell therapies. ⋯ Six health-care professionals and 11 patients and caregiver partners verified construct relevance to clinical management and lived experience, respectively. 109 constructs were sorted according to the four domains of conceptual framework: symptom burden, impact of disease and treatment, tolerability, and health-related quality of life. The identification of concepts beyond symptom burden underscores the importance of PRO measurement for long-term monitoring, to align outcomes with patient concerns. The framework will facilitate PRO measure selection for systematic gathering of PROs from individuals with haematological malignancies receiving CAR T-cell therapies.