Author:
Lombard Aurélie,Mistry Hitesh,Chapman Sonya C.,Gueoguieva Ivelina,Aarons Leon,Ogungbenro Kayode
Abstract
Abstract
Purpose
During oncology clinical trials, tumour size (TS) measurements are commonly used to monitor disease progression and to assess drug efficacy. We explored inter-operator variability within a subset of a phase III clinical trial conducted from August 1995 to February 1997 and its impact on drug effect evaluation using a tumour growth inhibition model.
Methods
One hundred twenty lesions were measured twice at each time point; once at the hospital and once at the centralised centre. A visual analysis was performed to identify trends within the profiles over time. Linear regression and relative error ratios were used to explore the inter-operator variability of raw TS measurements and model-based estimates.
Results
While correlation between patient-level estimates of drug effect was poor (r2 = 0.28), variability between the study-level estimates was much less affected (9%).
Conclusions
The global evaluation of drug effect using modelling approaches might not be affected by inter-operator variability. However, the exploration of covariates for drug effect and the characterisation of an exposure–tumour shrinkage relationship seems limited by the high measurement variability that translates to a poor correlation of individual drug effect estimates. This might be addressed by the use of more precise computer-aided measurement methods.
Funder
Centre for Applied Pharmacokinetic Research Division of Pharmacy and Optometry University of Manchester
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Pharmacology (medical),Cancer Research,Pharmacology,Toxicology,Oncology
Reference27 articles.
1. Hoogstraten B, Miller AB, Staquet M, Winkler A (1979) WHO Handbook for reporting results of cancer treatment. WHO offset publication No. 48, Geneva, vol 20
2. Therasse P, Arbuck SG, Eisenhauer EA, Wanders J, Kaplan RS, Rubinstein L, Verweij J, van Glabbeke M, van Oosterom AT, Christian MC, Gwyther SG (2000) New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. JNCI J Natl Cancer Inst 92(3):205–216. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/92.3.205
3. Therasse P, Eisenhauer EA, Verweij J (2006) RECIST revisited: a review of validation studies on tumour assessment. Eur J Cancer 42(8):1031–1039
4. Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J, Schwartz LH, Sargent D, Ford R, Dancey J, Arbuck S, Gwyther S, Mooney M, Rubinstein L, Shankar L, Dodd L, Kaplan R, Lacombe D, Verweij J (2009) New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer 45(2):228–247
5. Food and Drug Administration Guidance for Industry Clinical Trials Endpoints for the Approval of Cancer Drugs and Biologics https://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/Guidances/ucm071590.pdf. Assessed 21 Nov 2017
Cited by
2 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献