Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2011 Sep;67(3):1092-9.
doi: 10.1111/j.1541-0420.2010.01539.x. Epub 2011 Jan 6.

An audit strategy for progression-free survival

Affiliations

An audit strategy for progression-free survival

Lori E Dodd et al. Biometrics. 2011 Sep.

Abstract

In randomized clinical trials, the use of potentially subjective endpoints has led to frequent use of blinded independent central review (BICR) and event adjudication committees to reduce possible bias in treatment effect estimators based on local evaluations (LE). In oncology trials, progression-free survival (PFS) is one such endpoint. PFS requires image interpretation to determine whether a patient's cancer has progressed, and BICR has been advocated to reduce the potential for endpoints to be biased by knowledge of treatment assignment. There is current debate, however, about the value of such reviews with time-to-event outcomes such as PFS. We propose a BICR audit strategy as an alternative to a complete-case BICR to provide assurance of the presence of a treatment effect. We develop an auxiliary-variable estimator of the log-hazard ratio that is more efficient than simply using the audited (i.e., sampled) BICR data for estimation. Our estimator incorporates information from the LE on all the cases and the audited BICR cases, and is an asymptotically unbiased estimator of the log-hazard ratio from BICR. The estimator offers considerable efficiency gains that improve as the correlation between LE and BICR increases. A two-stage auditing strategy is also proposed and evaluated through simulation studies. The method is applied retrospectively to a large oncology trial that had a complete-case BICR, showing the potential for efficiency improvements.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Efficiency of proposed estimator relative to standard estimator for different audit sizes and correlations.

References

    1. Cochran WG. Sampling Techniques. 3. John. Wiley and Sons; New York, NY: 1977. pp. 189–204.
    1. Dodd LE, Korn EL, Freidlin B, Jaffe CC, Rubinstein LV, Dancey J, Mooney MM. Blinded independent central review of progression-free survival in phase III clinical trials: important design element or unnecessary expense? Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2008;26:3791–3796. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J, Schwartz LH, Sargent D, Ford R, Dancey J, Arbuck S, Gwyther S, Mooney M, Rubenstein L, Dodd L, Kaplan R, Lacombe D, Verweij J. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: Revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1) European Journal of Cancer. 2009;45:228–247. - PubMed
    1. EMEA. Methodological considerations for using progression-free survival (PFS) as primary endpoint in confirmatory trials for registration. 2008. http://www.emea.europa.eu/pdfs/human/ewp/2799408en.pdf.
    1. FDA. Guidance for industry clinical trial endpoints for the approval of cancer drugs and biologics. 2007. http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformati....

Publication types