Citations

Abstract Purpose The aim of this study was to investigate whether progression-free survival (PFS) can be considered a surrogate endpoint for overall survival (OS) in malignant mesothelioma. Materials and Methods Individual data were collected from 15 Cancer and Leukemia Group B (615 patients) and 2 North Central Cancer Treatment Group (101 patients) phase II trials. The effects of 5 risk factors for OS and PFS, including age, histology, performance status (PS), white blood cell count, and European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) risk score, were used in the analysis. Individual-level surrogacy was assessed by Kendall’s tau through a Clayton bivariate Copula survival (CBCS) model. Summary-level surrogacy was evaluated via the association between logarithms of the hazard ratio (log HR)—log HROS and log HRPFS—measured in R2 from a weighted least-square (WLS) regression model and the CBCS model. Results The median PFS for all patients was 3.0 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.8–3.5 months) and the median OS was 7.2 months (95% CI, 6.5–8.0 months). Moderate correlations between PFS and OS were observed across all risk factors at the individual level, with Kendall’s tau ranging from 0.46 to 0.47. The summary-level surrogacy varied among risk factors. The Copula R2 ranged from 0.51 for PS to 0.78 for histology. The WLS R2 ranged from 0.26 for EORTC and PS to 0.67 for age. Conclusions The analyses demonstrated low to moderate individual-level surrogacy between PFS and OS. At the summary level, the surrogacy between PFS and OS varied significantly across different risk factors. With a short postprogression survival and a moderate correlation between PFS and OS, there is no evidence that PFS is a valid surrogate endpoint for OS in malignant mesothelioma.

Abstract Objectives: To develop evidence-based guideline recommendations through a systematic review of the literature to establish standard molecular biomarker testing of colorectal cancer (CRC) tissues to guide epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) therapies and conventional chemotherapy regimens. Methods: The American Society for Clinical Pathology, College of American Pathologists, Association for Molecular Pathology, and American Society of Clinical Oncology convened an expert panel to develop an evidence-based guideline to establish standard molecular biomarker testing and guide therapies for patients with CRC. A comprehensive literature search that included more than 4,000 articles was conducted. Results: Twenty-one guideline statements were established. Conclusions: Evidence supports mutational testing for EGFR signaling pathway genes, since they provide clinically actionable information as negative predictors of benefit to anti-EGFR monoclonal antibody therapies for targeted therapy of CRC. Mutations in several of the biomarkers have clear prognostic value. Laboratory approaches to operationalize CRC molecular testing are presented.

Objectives.— To develop evidence-based guideline recommendations through a systematic review of the literature to establish standard molecular biomarker testing of colorectal cancer (CRC) tissues to guide epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) therapies and conventional chemotherapy regimens. Methods.— The American Society for Clinical Pathology, College of American Pathologists, Association for Molecular Pathology, and American Society of Clinical Oncology convened an expert panel to develop an evidence-based guideline to establish standard molecular biomarker testing and guide therapies for patients with CRC. A comprehensive literature search that included more than 4,000 articles was conducted. Results.— Twenty-one guideline statements were established. Conclusions.— Evidence supports mutational testing for EGFR signaling pathway genes, since they provide clinically actionable information as negative predictors of benefit to anti-EGFR monoclonal antibody therapies for targeted therapy of CRC. Mutations in several of the biomarkers have clear prognostic value. Laboratory approaches to operationalize CRC molecular testing are presented.

AbstractBackground.Preclinical and epidemiological data suggest that metformin might have antineoplastic properties against colon cancer (CC). However, the effect of metformin use on patient survival in stage III CC after curative resection is unknown. The survival outcomes were comparable regardless of the duration of metformin use.Patients and Methods.Before randomization to FOLFOX (folinic acid, 5-fluorouracil, oxaliplatin) with or without cetuximab, 1,958 patients with stage III CC enrolled in the N0147 study completed a questionnaire with information on diabetes mellitus (DM) and metformin use. Cox models were used to assess the association between metformin use and disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), and the time to recurrence (TTR), adjusting for clinical and/or pathological factors.Results.Of the 1,958 patients, 1,691 (86%) reported no history of DM, 115 reported DM with metformin use (6%), and 152 reported DM without metformin use (8%). The adjuvant treatment arms were pooled, because metformin use showed homogeneous effects on outcomes across the two arms. Among the patients with DM (n = 267), DFS (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.90; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.59–1.35; p = .60), OS (aHR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.65–1.49; p = .95), and TTR (aHR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.56–1.35; p = .53) were not different for the metformin users compared with the nonusers after adjusting for tumor and patient factors. The survival outcomes were comparable regardless of the duration of metformin use (<1, 1–5, 6–10, ≥11 years) before randomization (ptrend = .64 for DFS, ptrend = .84 for OS, and ptrend = .87 for TTR). No interaction effects were observed between metformin use and KRAS, BRAF mutation status, tumor site, T/N stage, gender, or age.Conclusions.Patients with stage III CC undergoing adjuvant chemotherapy who used metformin before the diagnosis of CC experienced DFS, OS, and TTR similar to those for non-DM patients and DM patients without metformin use.

Phase I oncology trials are designed to identify a safe dose with an acceptable toxicity profile. The dose is typically determined based on the probability of severe toxicity observed during the first treatment cycle, although patients continue to receive treatment for multiple cycles. In addition, the toxicity data from multiple types and grades are typically summarized into a single binary outcome of dose‐limiting toxicity. A novel endpoint, the total toxicity profile, was previously developed to account for the multiple toxicity types and grades. In this work, we propose to account for longitudinal repeated measures of total toxicity profile over multiple treatment cycles, accounting for cumulative toxicity during dosing‐finding. A linear mixed model was utilized in the Bayesian framework, with addition of Bayesian risk functions for decision‐making in dose assignment. The performance of this design is evaluated using simulation studies and compared with the previously proposed quasi‐likelihood continual reassessment method (QLCRM) design. Twelve clinical scenarios incorporating four different locations of maximum tolerated dose and three different time trends (decreasing, increasing, and no effect) were investigated. The proposed repeated measures design was comparable with the QLCRM when only cycle 1 data were utilized in dose‐finding; however, it demonstrated an improvement over the QLCRM when data from multiple cycles were used across all scenarios. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Progression‐free survival is an increasingly popular end point in oncology clinical trials. A complete blinded independent central review (BICR) is often required by regulators in an attempt to reduce the bias in progression‐free survival (PFS) assessment. In this paper, we propose a new methodology that uses a sample‐based BICR as an audit tool to decide whether a complete BICR is needed. More specifically, we propose a new index, the differential risk, to measure the reading discordance pattern, and develop a corresponding hypothesis testing procedure to decide whether the bias in local evaluation is acceptable. Simulation results demonstrate that our new index is sensitive to the change of discordance pattern; type I error is well controlled in the hypothesis testing procedure, and the calculated sample size provides the desired power. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.