Advertisement

Guidelines for time-to-event end-point definitions in trials for pancreatic cancer. Results of the DATECAN initiative (Definition for the Assessment of Time-to-event End-points in CANcer trials)

Published:September 23, 2014DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2014.07.011

      Abstract

      Background

      Using potential surrogate end-points for overall survival (OS) such as Disease-Free- (DFS) or Progression-Free Survival (PFS) is increasingly common in randomised controlled trials (RCTs). However, end-points are too often imprecisely defined which largely contributes to a lack of homogeneity across trials, hampering comparison between them. The aim of the DATECAN (Definition for the Assessment of Time-to-event End-points in CANcer trials)-Pancreas project is to provide guidelines for standardised definition of time-to-event end-points in RCTs for pancreatic cancer.

      Methods

      Time-to-event end-points currently used were identified from a literature review of pancreatic RCT trials (2006–2009). Academic research groups were contacted for participation in order to select clinicians and methodologists to participate in the pilot and scoring groups (>30 experts). A consensus was built after 2 rounds of the modified Delphi formal consensus approach with the Rand scoring methodology (range: 1–9).

      Results

      For pancreatic cancer, 14 time to event end-points and 25 distinct event types applied to two settings (detectable disease and/or no detectable disease) were considered relevant and included in the questionnaire sent to 52 selected experts. Thirty experts answered both scoring rounds. A total of 204 events distributed over the 14 end-points were scored. After the first round, consensus was reached for 25 items; after the second consensus was reached for 156 items; and after the face-to-face meeting for 203 items.

      Conclusion

      The formal consensus approach reached the elaboration of guidelines for standardised definitions of time-to-event end-points allowing cross-comparison of RCTs in pancreatic cancer.

      Keywords

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to European Journal of Cancer
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Mathoulin-Pelissier S.
        • Gourgou-Bourgade S.
        • Bonnetain F.
        • et al.
        Survival end point reporting in randomised cancer clinical trials: a review of major journals.
        J Clin Oncol. 2008; 26: 3721-3726
      1. Guidance for industry clinical trial end-points for the approval of cancer drugs and biologics, Food and Drugs Administration, Department of Health and Human Services, 2007.

        • Fleming T.R.
        • Rothmann M.D.
        • Lu H.L.
        Issues in using progression-free survival when evaluating oncology products.
        J Clin Oncol. 2009; 27: 2874-2880
        • Nout R.A.
        • Fiets W.E.
        • Struikmans H.
        • et al.
        The in- or exclusion of non-breast cancer related death and contralateral breast cancer significantly affects estimated outcome probability in early breast cancer.
        Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2008; 109: 567-572
        • Punt C.J.
        • Buyse M.
        • Kohne C.H.
        • et al.
        End-points in adjuvant treatment trials: a systematic review of the literature in colon cancer and proposed definitions for future trials.
        J Natl Cancer Inst. 2007; 99: 998-1003
        • Llovet J.M.
        • Di Bisceglie A.M.
        • Bruix J.
        • et al.
        Design and end-points of clinical trials in hepatocellular carcinoma.
        J Natl Cancer Inst. 2008; 100: 698-711
        • Hudis C.A.
        • Barlow W.E.
        • Costantino J.P.
        • et al.
        Proposal for standardised definitions for efficacy end points in adjuvant breast cancer trials: the STEEP system.
        J Clin Oncol. 2007; 25: 2127-2132
        • Bellera C.A.P.M.
        • Gourgou S.
        • Collette L.
        • Doussau A.
        • Kramar A.
        • Dabakuyo S.
        • et al.
        Protocol of the DATECAN study: formal consensus method for the development of guidelines for standardised time-to-event end-points’ definitions in cancer clinical trials.
        Eur J Cancer. 2013; 49: 769-781
        • Fitch K.
        • Bernstein S.
        • Aguilar M.
        • et al.
        The RAND/UCLA appropriateness method user’s manual.
        Santa Monica, RAND2001
      2. Bases méthodologiques pour l’élaboration de recommandations professionnelles par consensus formalisé, Haute Autorité en Santé, 2006.

      3. MeSH – National library of medicine’s controlled vocabulary thesaurus http://www.nlm.nih.gov/pubs/factsheets/mesh.html.

        • Jones J.
        • Hunter D.
        Consensus methods for medical and health services research.
        BMJ. 1995; 311: 376-380
      4. Linstone AH, Turoff M: The Delphi Method: techniques and applications. (ed Addison-Wesley Pub. Co.), Linstone & Turoff Editors, 1975.

      5. Murphy MK, Black NA, Lamping DL, et al.: Consensus development methods, and their use in clinical guideline development. Health Technol Assess 2:i-iv, 1–88, 1998.

        • Neoptolemos J.P.
        • Moore M.J.
        • Cox T.F.
        • et al.
        Effect of adjuvant chemotherapy with fluorouracil plus folinic acid or gemcitabine versus observation on survival in patients with resected periampullary adenocarcinoma: the ESPAC-3 periampullary cancer randomised trial.
        JAMA. 2012; 308: 147-156
        • Loehrer Sr., P.J.
        • Feng Y.
        • Cardenes H.
        • et al.
        Gemcitabine alone versus gemcitabine plus radiotherapy in patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer: an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group trial.
        J Clin Oncol. 2011; 29: 4105-4112
        • Oettle H.
        • Post S.
        • Neuhaus P.
        • et al.
        Adjuvant chemotherapy with gemcitabine versus observation in patients undergoing curative-intent resection of pancreatic cancer: a randomised controlled trial.
        JAMA. 2007; 297: 267-277
        • Hattangadi J.A.
        • Hong T.S.
        • Yeap B.Y.
        • et al.
        Results and patterns of failure in patients treated with adjuvant combined chemoradiation therapy for resected pancreatic adenocarcinoma.
        Cancer. 2009; 115: 3640-3650
        • Birgisson H.
        • Wallin U.
        • Holmberg L.
        • et al.
        Survival end-points in colorectal cancer and the effect of second primary other cancer on disease free survival.
        BMC Cancer. 2011; 11: 438