Sherry, Alexander D

PURPOSE We tested the hypothesis that adding metastasis-directed therapy (MDT) to standard-of-care (SOC) systemic therapy improves progression-free survival (PFS) among patients with oligometastatic disease. METHODS EXTEND was a multicenter randomized phase II trial. Patients with 1-5 metastases were randomly assigned to MDT + SOC versus SOC in one of the six baskets (breast, pancreas, kidney, two prostate baskets, and an other basket) with basket-specific stratification and powering. PFS, the primary end point, was prespecified in the per-protocol set within each basket, across all baskets, and across all baskets excluding the prostate baskets. Exploratory end points included circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) and immune profiling. RESULTS From 2018 through 2023, 521 patients were screened, 350 were randomly assigned, and 334 were analyzed per protocol (MDT + SOC, n = 166; SOC, n = 168). Radiotherapy was used as MDT for 98% of metastases (370/379). Overall, after a median follow-up of 53 months, PFS was improved with MDT + SOC (hazard ratio [HR], 0.54 [95% CI, 0.41 to 0.72], P < .001). Similarly, PFS was improved when excluding the prostate baskets (HR, 0.60 [95% CI, 0.40 to 0.89]). Within each basket, PFS superiority was identified for the pancreas, prostate, and other baskets, whereas the breast and kidney baskets were inconclusive. At enrollment, detectable ctDNA correlated with shorter PFS and survival; by contrast, ctDNA clearance 3 months postenrollment correlated with improved survival. MDT + SOC-induced systemic immune activation was most pronounced among baskets demonstrating PFS superiority. CONCLUSION The phase II EXTEND trial supports the addition of MDT to SOC for oligometastatic disease. Histology-specific efficacy signals were identified for phase III testing. Translational insights suggest the potential for optimizing the definition of oligometastasis using ctDNA and point to systemic immune responses as a possible mechanism of benefit from MDT.

PURPOSE Most oncology trials define superiority according to dichotomized P value thresholds, which are frequently misinterpreted. Posterior probability, however, directly estimates the probability of the hypothesis at hand. Here, we reanalyze a large collection of modern phase III trials and benchmark posterior probability versus the standard trial interpretation based on statistical significance. METHODS Outcomes from 194,129 patients were manually reconstructed from the primary end points of 230 phase III, superiority-design oncology trials. Posterior probabilities of treatment effect were then calculated across multiple priors and several effect sizes of clinical relevance, including minimum clinically important difference (MCID) defined as hazard ratio (HR) < 0.8 per ASCO criteria or HR < 0.64 per European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO) criteria. RESULTS All trials interpreted as superior using P value thresholds had probabilities >90% for achieving at least marginal benefits (HR < 1). However, only 62% of positive trials (74/120) had >90% probabilities of achieving the ASCO MCID (HR < 0.8), even under an enthusiastic prior, including 70% of trials (57/82) leading to regulatory approval. Only 30% of positive trials (36/120) had >90% probability of achieving the ESMO MCID (HR < 0.64). Conversely, 24% of trials (26/110) interpreted as not superior had >90% probability of achieving marginal benefits (HR < 1), even under a skeptical prior. CONCLUSION Bayesian models, although often in agreement with statistical significance thresholds, add considerable unique interpretative value for a subset of phase III oncology trials. Posterior probability may provide a solution for overcoming the discrepancies between refuting the null hypothesis and detecting clinically relevant effects.

Abstract Purpose: Circulating tumor fraction estimate (ctFE) is a machine learning–derived composite metric of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) burden. We hypothesized that pre-treatment and early on-treatment ctFE could robustly risk-stratify patients with locally advanced (LA) and oligometastatic non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with radiotherapy (RT). Experimental Design: In a prospective phase II clinical trial (NCT03916419), 26 patients with unresectable stage IIB to IIIC NSCLC received magnetic resonance (MR)-guided hypofractionated chemoradiotherapy (chemoRT) followed by immunotherapy. Plasma ctDNA was profiled at baseline and mid-treatment (days 10–14) to derive ctFE and maximum variant allele frequency (Max VAF). A burden-based ctFE threshold derived from baseline samples was applied unchanged to mid-treatment samples and validated in two external cohorts: LA NSCLC treated with chemoRT (LA-RW; n = 94) and oligometastatic NSCLC treated with RT (OM-RW; n = 309). Results: Pre- and mid-treatment ctFE burden strongly stratified overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), outperforming Max VAF and ctFE detectability. The baseline ctFE was prognostic for OS (HR 5.93, P = 0.005) and PFS (HR 11.08, P &lt; 0.001) and remained significant at mid-treatment (OS: HR 7.08; PFS: HR 12.06; both P &lt; 0.001). Early ctFE dynamics defined three molecular response groups with OS separation (median OS 60.8 vs. 13.0 vs. 2.9 months; P &lt; 0.001). ctFE remained associated with survival in both validation cohorts. Conclusions: Early ctFE derived from a clinically available, tumor-naïve ctDNA assay enables noninvasive risk stratification in LA and oligometastatic NSCLC treated with RT, supporting its use as a practical biomarker for precision treatment adaptation.

Background/Objectives: We performed a systematic review of preclinical literature on the use of high-LET particle therapy, DDRi, and/or immunotherapy specifically in pMMR colorectal cancer. Methods: A systematic review of the literature published between 2014 and 2025 was conducted across major databases. Studies were included if they examined particle radiotherapy (e.g., proton, alpha, and carbon) or X-ray radiation either alone or in combination with DDRi and/or immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in pMMR colorectal cancer models. Results: In total, 131 studies met the inclusion criteria, including 70 preclinical studies. These studies consistently demonstrate that high-LET radiation amplifies immunogenic cell death, increases cGAS-STING pathway activation, and enhances tumor antigen presentation, thereby fostering greater immune infiltration and systemic antitumor responses. Concurrent irradiation with DDRi enhances persistent DNA damage and cytosolic DNA accumulation. In murine models, high-LET therapies show excellent local control, with manageable toxicity profiles. Combination regimens with ICIs exhibit improved local control and elicit systemic antitumor immune responses. Conclusions: High-LET particle radiation and/or the use of concurrent DDRi with ICI have significant preclinical evidence of immunostimulatory effects in pMMR rectal adenocarcinoma and increased response rates to immunotherapy. The clinical evidence will be reviewed in the companion manuscript.

Background/Objectives: We performed a systematic review of the current clinical and preclinical literature on the use of particle therapy, DDRi, and/or immunotherapy, specifically for pMMR colorectal cancer. Methods: A systematic review of the literature published between 2014 and 2025 was conducted across major databases. Studies were included if they examined particle radiotherapy (e.g., proton, alpha, carbon) either alone or in combination with DDRi and/or immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI), or X-ray radiotherapy (XRT) in combination with DDRi/ICI. Results: In total, 133 studies met the inclusion criteria, including 62 clinical studies. Clinically, particle therapies show excellent local control and normal tissue sparing, with manageable toxicity profiles. Trials with any form of radiation and DDRi are few, potentially owing to toxicity concerns. ICI combinations showed promising efficacy with XRT, with no randomized trials comparing them to particle radiation. Conclusions: Particle radiation and/or DDRi have significant preclinical evidence of immunostimulatory effects in pMMR rectal adenocarcinoma and increase response rates to immunotherapy (presented in the companion manuscript). Despite strong preclinical evidence and rationale, clinical trials including all three modalities are scarce. Existing evidence suggests a potential benefit based on extrapolation from photon-based studies and supports prospective evaluation with careful attention to treatment-related toxicity, which remains a concern.

Abstract Background In randomized clinical trials (RCTs), anticipating control arm outcomes is important for power calculations and enrollment goals. Unexpected overperformance of the control arm can underpower RCTs. The objective of this study was to estimate the prevalence of control arm overperformance in phase 3 oncology RCTs. Methods The authors conducted a meta‐epidemiological study of two‐arm, superiority‐design, phase 3 oncology RCTs. They reviewed articles/publications and protocols for power calculations, justification, and outcomes. Control arm performance was measured as the ratio of observed control arm outcomes relative to pretrial estimates, and overperformance was defined as a 10% improvement. Results In total, 385 RCTs met inclusion criteria. The primary end point was overall survival (OS) in 134 RCTs (35%). Of 311 RCTs (81%) that provided a pretrial estimate for control arm performance, 138 RCTs (44%) cited a justification for the estimate. Greater than expected control arm performance was associated with lower odds of meeting the primary end point (adjusted odds ratio, 0.989; 95% confidence interval, 0.981–0.998; p = 0.015). Of 244 RCTs that were evaluable for control arm performance, 104 (43%) exhibited overperformance. RCTs that used OS as a primary end point were more likely to exhibit control arm overperformance compared with RCTs that used other primary end points (56% vs. 33%; adjusted odds ratio, 2.43; 95% confidence interval, 1.42–4.15; p = .001). Conclusions Control arm overperformance is common in phase 3 oncology RCTs and is associated with trial outcomes, suggesting an effect on study power. Because overperformance appears to be especially prevalent when OS is the primary end point, the effects of postprogression therapies on OS may be underappreciated. Alternative strategies for designing trials should be considered for reliable estimation of treatment effects.

Abstract In phase 3 oncology clinical trials, identifying and understanding potential sources of differential censoring (DC), which describes censoring imbalance between treatment arms, in overall survival (OS) endpoints is vital to reduce bias and misinterpretation of OS benefit. Among 322 trials, 34 (11%) trials exhibited DC overrepresented in the control arm (DCC). Compared to trials without DC or those with DC overrepresented in the experimental arm (DCE), trials with DCC showed higher rates of OS benefit (56% vs. 32%; odds ratio [OR] = 2.26, 95% CI = 1.04 to 4.90; P = .04) and were associated with patient withdrawal (median 8.0% vs. 3.8%; P = .0002), lack of double blinding (15% vs. 48%, OR = 0.19, 95% CI = 0.06 to 0.56; P = .003), and better global quality of life in the experimental arm (32% vs. 13%, OR = 3.01, 95% CI = 1.26 to 7.19; P = .01). OS DCC is a prominent challenge that requires rigorous trial design and comprehensive patient and mortality follow-up to reduce bias in interpreting OS benefit.

ABSTRACT Background Blinding mitigates bias in randomized trials and may be especially crucial for surrogate endpoints, such as progression‐free survival (PFS). Here, we characterize utilization of and factors associated with blinding in Phase III oncology trials with PFS primary endpoints. Methods Two‐arm, superiority‐design trials investigating systemic therapy were identified in May 2024 from ClinicalTrials.gov with no date limitation. Trials were required to have a PFS primary endpoint. The study outcomes were the presence of double‐blind designs and blinded independent central review (BICR) for the primary endpoint. Ninety‐five percent credible intervals for binary outcomes were estimated from beta distributions, and multivariable logistic regressions explored associations with trial‐level features. Results After screening, 237 trials were included, enrolling 127,518 patients. A double‐blind design was used in 105 trials (44%, 95% CrI 38%–51%). BICR was used in 111 trials (47%, 95% CrI 41%–53%), including 39 double‐blind trials (16%, 95% CrI 12%–22%). Trials with BICR had higher odds of meeting the primary endpoint (OR 1.84; 95% CI 1.06–3.18; p = 0.03). The PFS assessor identity (central vs. local) or blinding status was not reported in 50 trials (26%, 95% CrI 16%–27%). Trials that met prespecified significance criteria for PFS were more likely to report whether PFS assessors were blinded/unblinded and central/local (OR, 3.05; 95% Cl: 1.60–5.81; p = 0.0007). Conclusions Despite the importance of double blinding in combination with BICR for reducing bias, only a few trials blinded physicians, patients, and primary endpoint assessors. This meta‐epidemiological study illuminates the prevalence of potential assessment biases affecting PFS in Phase III oncology and secondarily emphasizes the need for improved methodology reporting.