Alternative end points to evaluate a therapeutic strategy in advanced colorectal cancer: Evaluation of progression-free survival, duration of disease control, and time to failure of strategy - An Aide et Recherche en Canceŕologie Digestive Group study

Benoist Chibaudel, Franck Bonnetain, Qian D Shi, Marc Buyse, Christophe Tournigand, Daniel J. Sargent, Carmen J. Allegra, Richard M. Goldberg, Aimery De Gramont

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

37 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: Progression-free survival (PFS) is not an optimal end point to evaluate therapeutic strategies in advanced colorectal cancer (ACRC). Therefore, composite end points have been proposed to evaluate a chemotherapy strategy when sequential treatments are available: duration of disease control (DDC) and time to failure of strategy (TFS). The goal of this study was to evaluate these alternative end points and their potential surrogacy for overall survival (OS). Methods: We pooled individual patient data from three randomized trials evaluating chemotherapy strategy, which accrued 1,042 patients with previously untreated ACRC. In these trials, first-line treatment was either oxaliplatin- or irinotecan-based chemotherapy. Compared with TFS, DDC included neither time interval between progression and next sequence of treatment nor time to progression if the best result of the next sequence of treatment was progression. Results: There was good correlation between DDC and OS (correlation of median: r, 0.62; correlation of hazard ratio [HR]: adjusted copula R 2, 0.72) and between TFS and OS (correlation of median: r, 0.59; correlation of HR: adjusted copula R 2, 0.67). There was no correlation between PFS and OS (correlation of median: r, 0.45; correlation of HR: adjusted copula R 2, 0.47). Conclusion: DDC and TFS roughly achieved the same results. Both are acceptable new end points to evaluate a therapeutic strategy in ACRC. Although TFS achieved a pragmatic evaluation of a multiline strategy, DDC captured the effect of a specific sequence in a therapeutic strategy.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)4199-4204
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of Clinical Oncology
Volume29
Issue number31
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 1 2011

Fingerprint

Disease-Free Survival
Colorectal Neoplasms
oxaliplatin
irinotecan
Survival
Drug Therapy
Therapeutics

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cancer Research
  • Oncology

Cite this

Alternative end points to evaluate a therapeutic strategy in advanced colorectal cancer : Evaluation of progression-free survival, duration of disease control, and time to failure of strategy - An Aide et Recherche en Canceŕologie Digestive Group study. / Chibaudel, Benoist; Bonnetain, Franck; Shi, Qian D; Buyse, Marc; Tournigand, Christophe; Sargent, Daniel J.; Allegra, Carmen J.; Goldberg, Richard M.; De Gramont, Aimery.

In: Journal of Clinical Oncology, Vol. 29, No. 31, 01.11.2011, p. 4199-4204.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Chibaudel, Benoist ; Bonnetain, Franck ; Shi, Qian D ; Buyse, Marc ; Tournigand, Christophe ; Sargent, Daniel J. ; Allegra, Carmen J. ; Goldberg, Richard M. ; De Gramont, Aimery. / Alternative end points to evaluate a therapeutic strategy in advanced colorectal cancer : Evaluation of progression-free survival, duration of disease control, and time to failure of strategy - An Aide et Recherche en Canceŕologie Digestive Group study. In: Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2011 ; Vol. 29, No. 31. pp. 4199-4204.
@article{b0182a202da14a76b455a4cbb0dd5cf1,
title = "Alternative end points to evaluate a therapeutic strategy in advanced colorectal cancer: Evaluation of progression-free survival, duration of disease control, and time to failure of strategy - An Aide et Recherche en Canceŕologie Digestive Group study",
abstract = "Purpose: Progression-free survival (PFS) is not an optimal end point to evaluate therapeutic strategies in advanced colorectal cancer (ACRC). Therefore, composite end points have been proposed to evaluate a chemotherapy strategy when sequential treatments are available: duration of disease control (DDC) and time to failure of strategy (TFS). The goal of this study was to evaluate these alternative end points and their potential surrogacy for overall survival (OS). Methods: We pooled individual patient data from three randomized trials evaluating chemotherapy strategy, which accrued 1,042 patients with previously untreated ACRC. In these trials, first-line treatment was either oxaliplatin- or irinotecan-based chemotherapy. Compared with TFS, DDC included neither time interval between progression and next sequence of treatment nor time to progression if the best result of the next sequence of treatment was progression. Results: There was good correlation between DDC and OS (correlation of median: r, 0.62; correlation of hazard ratio [HR]: adjusted copula R 2, 0.72) and between TFS and OS (correlation of median: r, 0.59; correlation of HR: adjusted copula R 2, 0.67). There was no correlation between PFS and OS (correlation of median: r, 0.45; correlation of HR: adjusted copula R 2, 0.47). Conclusion: DDC and TFS roughly achieved the same results. Both are acceptable new end points to evaluate a therapeutic strategy in ACRC. Although TFS achieved a pragmatic evaluation of a multiline strategy, DDC captured the effect of a specific sequence in a therapeutic strategy.",
author = "Benoist Chibaudel and Franck Bonnetain and Shi, {Qian D} and Marc Buyse and Christophe Tournigand and Sargent, {Daniel J.} and Allegra, {Carmen J.} and Goldberg, {Richard M.} and {De Gramont}, Aimery",
year = "2011",
month = "11",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1200/JCO.2011.35.5867",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "29",
pages = "4199--4204",
journal = "Journal of Clinical Oncology",
issn = "0732-183X",
publisher = "American Society of Clinical Oncology",
number = "31",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Alternative end points to evaluate a therapeutic strategy in advanced colorectal cancer

T2 - Evaluation of progression-free survival, duration of disease control, and time to failure of strategy - An Aide et Recherche en Canceŕologie Digestive Group study

AU - Chibaudel, Benoist

AU - Bonnetain, Franck

AU - Shi, Qian D

AU - Buyse, Marc

AU - Tournigand, Christophe

AU - Sargent, Daniel J.

AU - Allegra, Carmen J.

AU - Goldberg, Richard M.

AU - De Gramont, Aimery

PY - 2011/11/1

Y1 - 2011/11/1

N2 - Purpose: Progression-free survival (PFS) is not an optimal end point to evaluate therapeutic strategies in advanced colorectal cancer (ACRC). Therefore, composite end points have been proposed to evaluate a chemotherapy strategy when sequential treatments are available: duration of disease control (DDC) and time to failure of strategy (TFS). The goal of this study was to evaluate these alternative end points and their potential surrogacy for overall survival (OS). Methods: We pooled individual patient data from three randomized trials evaluating chemotherapy strategy, which accrued 1,042 patients with previously untreated ACRC. In these trials, first-line treatment was either oxaliplatin- or irinotecan-based chemotherapy. Compared with TFS, DDC included neither time interval between progression and next sequence of treatment nor time to progression if the best result of the next sequence of treatment was progression. Results: There was good correlation between DDC and OS (correlation of median: r, 0.62; correlation of hazard ratio [HR]: adjusted copula R 2, 0.72) and between TFS and OS (correlation of median: r, 0.59; correlation of HR: adjusted copula R 2, 0.67). There was no correlation between PFS and OS (correlation of median: r, 0.45; correlation of HR: adjusted copula R 2, 0.47). Conclusion: DDC and TFS roughly achieved the same results. Both are acceptable new end points to evaluate a therapeutic strategy in ACRC. Although TFS achieved a pragmatic evaluation of a multiline strategy, DDC captured the effect of a specific sequence in a therapeutic strategy.

AB - Purpose: Progression-free survival (PFS) is not an optimal end point to evaluate therapeutic strategies in advanced colorectal cancer (ACRC). Therefore, composite end points have been proposed to evaluate a chemotherapy strategy when sequential treatments are available: duration of disease control (DDC) and time to failure of strategy (TFS). The goal of this study was to evaluate these alternative end points and their potential surrogacy for overall survival (OS). Methods: We pooled individual patient data from three randomized trials evaluating chemotherapy strategy, which accrued 1,042 patients with previously untreated ACRC. In these trials, first-line treatment was either oxaliplatin- or irinotecan-based chemotherapy. Compared with TFS, DDC included neither time interval between progression and next sequence of treatment nor time to progression if the best result of the next sequence of treatment was progression. Results: There was good correlation between DDC and OS (correlation of median: r, 0.62; correlation of hazard ratio [HR]: adjusted copula R 2, 0.72) and between TFS and OS (correlation of median: r, 0.59; correlation of HR: adjusted copula R 2, 0.67). There was no correlation between PFS and OS (correlation of median: r, 0.45; correlation of HR: adjusted copula R 2, 0.47). Conclusion: DDC and TFS roughly achieved the same results. Both are acceptable new end points to evaluate a therapeutic strategy in ACRC. Although TFS achieved a pragmatic evaluation of a multiline strategy, DDC captured the effect of a specific sequence in a therapeutic strategy.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=80755155711&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=80755155711&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1200/JCO.2011.35.5867

DO - 10.1200/JCO.2011.35.5867

M3 - Article

C2 - 21969501

AN - SCOPUS:80755155711

VL - 29

SP - 4199

EP - 4204

JO - Journal of Clinical Oncology

JF - Journal of Clinical Oncology

SN - 0732-183X

IS - 31

ER -