nicolas penel andrew kramar centre oscar lambret, lille, france
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Nicolas PENEL Andrew KRAMAR Centre Oscar Lambret, Lille, France](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022052701/56649e545503460f94b4b654/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Activity endpoints in soft tissue sarcoma phase II trials
Quality and correlations with overall survival
Nicolas PENEL Andrew KRAMAR
Centre Oscar Lambret, Lille, France
![Page 2: Nicolas PENEL Andrew KRAMAR Centre Oscar Lambret, Lille, France](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022052701/56649e545503460f94b4b654/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Primary endpoints
Critical choiceFew promising drugsPromising drugs failed to improve overall survival
Q1: What is the quality of reported primary endpoints ?Q2: What are the correlation between activity endpoints
and overall survival ? Q3: What are the distribution of activity endpoints in
positive and negative trials ?
![Page 3: Nicolas PENEL Andrew KRAMAR Centre Oscar Lambret, Lille, France](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022052701/56649e545503460f94b4b654/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Method - GeneralCriteria of selection of trials:
Phase II trials Chemotherapy (single agents or combination) or
moleculary targeted agents After failure/intolerance to doxorubicinFull reports issued between January 1999 and
August 2011English-written reports
Systematic analysis of53 trials 77 strata
![Page 4: Nicolas PENEL Andrew KRAMAR Centre Oscar Lambret, Lille, France](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022052701/56649e545503460f94b4b654/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
![Page 5: Nicolas PENEL Andrew KRAMAR Centre Oscar Lambret, Lille, France](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022052701/56649e545503460f94b4b654/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
![Page 6: Nicolas PENEL Andrew KRAMAR Centre Oscar Lambret, Lille, France](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022052701/56649e545503460f94b4b654/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
![Page 7: Nicolas PENEL Andrew KRAMAR Centre Oscar Lambret, Lille, France](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022052701/56649e545503460f94b4b654/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Q 1: What is the quality of reported primary endpoints ?
![Page 8: Nicolas PENEL Andrew KRAMAR Centre Oscar Lambret, Lille, France](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022052701/56649e545503460f94b4b654/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Nature of primary endpointPrimary endpoint Studies
Absence of defined primary endpoint 12/53 (22%)
Defined primary endpoint
Best objective response 21/53 (39%)
Progression-free rate at 6 months
7/53 (13%)
Progression-free rate at 3 months
4/53 (6%)
Progression-free rate at 4 months
2/53 (4%)
Time to progression 2/53 (2%)
Progression-free survival 1/53 (2%)
Rate of “remission” 1/53 (2%)
![Page 9: Nicolas PENEL Andrew KRAMAR Centre Oscar Lambret, Lille, France](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022052701/56649e545503460f94b4b654/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Precise definition of primary endpoint
Primary endpoint Studies
Absence of defined primary endpoint 12/53 (22%)
Defined primary endpoint
Not precisely defined 5/53 (10%)
Precisely defined 36/53 (68%)
![Page 10: Nicolas PENEL Andrew KRAMAR Centre Oscar Lambret, Lille, France](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022052701/56649e545503460f94b4b654/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Design/Methodology Key-issues Categories Studies
Design Stratification 6/53 (11%)
Randomization 3/53 (5%)
Central radiological review
Yes 2/53 (3%)
No 51/53 (97%)
Stastical hypothesis
Yes 41/53 (77%)
No 12/53 (33%)
![Page 11: Nicolas PENEL Andrew KRAMAR Centre Oscar Lambret, Lille, France](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022052701/56649e545503460f94b4b654/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
interpretation of the results Results Studies
Promising drug 7/77 (10%)
Inactive drug 38/77 (50%)
Ininterpretable results because of absence of statistical hypothesis
12/77 (15%)
Ininterpretable results because of absence of reported data
20/77 (25%)
![Page 12: Nicolas PENEL Andrew KRAMAR Centre Oscar Lambret, Lille, France](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022052701/56649e545503460f94b4b654/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Q 2: What are the correlation between activity endpoints and overall survival ?
![Page 13: Nicolas PENEL Andrew KRAMAR Centre Oscar Lambret, Lille, France](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022052701/56649e545503460f94b4b654/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
Med
ian O
ve
rall
Surv
iva
l
0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6Best Objective Response Rate
Trial Point L-Fit
Poor correlation between mOS and BORR: p=0.058
![Page 14: Nicolas PENEL Andrew KRAMAR Centre Oscar Lambret, Lille, France](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022052701/56649e545503460f94b4b654/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Good correlation between 6-month PFR and OS (p=0.005)
![Page 15: Nicolas PENEL Andrew KRAMAR Centre Oscar Lambret, Lille, France](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022052701/56649e545503460f94b4b654/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Endpoints strata R pBest objective response 48 0.276 0.058
Best tumour control rate 48 0.276 0.257
3-month progression-free rate
39 0.466 0.002
6-month progression-free rate
41 0.430 0.005
Median progression-free survival
45 0.402 0.006
![Page 16: Nicolas PENEL Andrew KRAMAR Centre Oscar Lambret, Lille, France](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022052701/56649e545503460f94b4b654/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Q 3: Distributions of endpoints in cases of active or inactive drugs?
![Page 17: Nicolas PENEL Andrew KRAMAR Centre Oscar Lambret, Lille, France](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022052701/56649e545503460f94b4b654/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Categories Inactive drug Active drug p
EORTC STBSG Definition
3-month PFR <39% Or 6-month PFR <14%
3-month PFR ≥39% & 6-month PFR ≥14%
-
Strata 33 26
3-month PFR (%) Median (range)
26.0 (0.0-42.0) 48.0 (40.0-75.0) (0.0001)
6-month PFR (%) Median (range)
9.0 (0.0-39.0) 30.0 (15.0-55.0) (0.0001)
BORR (%) Median (range)
0.0 (0.0-19.0) 10.0 (0.0-53.0) 0.0001
BTCR (%) Median (range)
29.0 (6.0-50.0 43.0 (14.0-77.0) 0.00001
Median PFS (months)
Median (range)
1.9 (0.2-3.03) 3.35 (1.8-12.0) 0.0001
Median OS (months)
Median (range)
10.3 (4.9-22.8) 11.8 (4.9-22.4) 0.463
![Page 18: Nicolas PENEL Andrew KRAMAR Centre Oscar Lambret, Lille, France](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022052701/56649e545503460f94b4b654/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Q1: Key-findingsNumerous (7 ≠) and not suitable primary endpoints (BORR)
Poorly defined endpoint (32% of the studies)
Absence of central radiological review (98% of the studies)
Absence of statistical hypothesis (33%)
Ininterpretable results (40%)
![Page 19: Nicolas PENEL Andrew KRAMAR Centre Oscar Lambret, Lille, France](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022052701/56649e545503460f94b4b654/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Q2: Endpoints possibly correlated with OS
3-month progression free rate
6-month progression free rate
Median progression-free survival
![Page 20: Nicolas PENEL Andrew KRAMAR Centre Oscar Lambret, Lille, France](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022052701/56649e545503460f94b4b654/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Q3: Current definition of active drugs
Using current definitions of active/inactive drugs:
All primary endpoints are statistically higher with « active drugs »
But
OS was not statistically different in active compared to inactive drugs
![Page 21: Nicolas PENEL Andrew KRAMAR Centre Oscar Lambret, Lille, France](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022052701/56649e545503460f94b4b654/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
ConclusionBetter definition the primary endpointRole of the central radiological reviewStatistical hypothesis based on primary endpoint Endpoints correlated with OS (PFR3 , PFR6 and PFS)
But Current definitions of active drug failed to identify
drugs able to improve the OSWe have to refine the thresholds of PFR3 and PFR6
defining active drugs
![Page 22: Nicolas PENEL Andrew KRAMAR Centre Oscar Lambret, Lille, France](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022052701/56649e545503460f94b4b654/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Thank your for your attention