Physicians' Perception of the Evidence in Relation to Primary Endpoints of Clinical Trials on Breast Cancer
- PMID: 35702493
- PMCID: PMC9149490
- DOI: 10.1159/000518260
Physicians' Perception of the Evidence in Relation to Primary Endpoints of Clinical Trials on Breast Cancer
Abstract
Objective: To investigate physicians' perception of the evidence of clinical trials on breast cancer.
Methods: A survey was conducted by the Chinese Society of Breast Surgeons. We investigated the physicians' perception of meaningful endpoints, appropriate follow-up duration, and clinically acceptable benefit through online questionnaires.
Results: Among 278 validated questionnaires, the majority of the questions had no consistent answer. For local treatment, 30.6, 28.8, and 28.4% of participants regarded locoregional recurrence (LRR), disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS) as the most meaningful endpoint, respectively, 47.5% believed that 5-year follow-up can alter clinical practice, and 34.5% thought it should be >10 years. In the adjuvant setting, 45.7, 38.5, and 12.9% regarded DFS, OS, and LRR as the most meaningful endpoint, respectively, 52.5% thought that 10-year follow-up was solid, while 37.4% thought that 5-year follow-up was enough. In the advanced setting, 49.6, 24.1, and 23.7% considered progression-free survival, quality of life, and OS the most meaningful endpoint, respectively, and 39.6 and 28.8% considered that a follow-up of 1 year and 3 years, respectively, was meaningful. Similarly, the clinically acceptable absolute difference was inconsistent.
Conclusion: Most Chinese oncologists advocated that surrogate endpoints could be used in certain circumstances, though OS was the most reliable one in breast cancer studies. Doctors' perceptions of follow-up time and magnitude of benefit vary widely, reflecting the fact that there are many unanswered questions about supporting the use of new cancer treatments; a common understanding needs to be reached, such as a very consensual surrogate endpoint and a meaningful sufficiently large therapeutic benefit.
Keywords: Breast cancer; Clinical trial; Primary endpoint.
Copyright © 2021 by S. Karger AG, Basel.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors declare no competing nonfinancial/financial interests.
Figures



Similar articles
-
Surrogate endpoints for overall survival in digestive oncology trials: which candidates? A questionnaires survey among clinicians and methodologists.BMC Cancer. 2010 Jun 10;10:277. doi: 10.1186/1471-2407-10-277. BMC Cancer. 2010. PMID: 20537166 Free PMC article.
-
Statistical considerations and endpoints for clinical lung cancer studies: Can progression free survival (PFS) substitute overall survival (OS) as a valid endpoint in clinical trials for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer?Transl Lung Cancer Res. 2012 Mar;1(1):26-35. doi: 10.3978/j.issn.2218-6751.2011.12.08. Transl Lung Cancer Res. 2012. PMID: 25806152 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Gene expression profiling for guiding adjuvant chemotherapy decisions in women with early breast cancer: an evidence-based and economic analysis.Ont Health Technol Assess Ser. 2010;10(23):1-57. Epub 2010 Dec 1. Ont Health Technol Assess Ser. 2010. PMID: 23074401 Free PMC article.
-
Surrogate endpoints for overall survival in lung cancer trials: a review.Expert Rev Anticancer Ther. 2017 May;17(5):447-454. doi: 10.1080/14737140.2017.1316196. Epub 2017 Apr 12. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther. 2017. PMID: 28399678 Review.
-
Association between disease-free survival and overall survival when survival is prolonged after recurrence in patients receiving cytotoxic adjuvant therapy for colon cancer: simulations based on the 20,800 patient ACCENT data set.J Clin Oncol. 2010 Jan 20;28(3):460-5. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2009.23.1407. Epub 2009 Dec 14. J Clin Oncol. 2010. PMID: 20008641 Free PMC article.
Cited by
-
What constitutes meaningful benefit of cancer drugs in the context of LMICs? A mixed-methods study of oncologists' perceptions on endpoints, benefit, price, and value of cancer drugs.ESMO Open. 2024 Nov;9(11):103976. doi: 10.1016/j.esmoop.2024.103976. Epub 2024 Nov 6. ESMO Open. 2024. PMID: 39510022 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, Laversanne M, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A, et al. Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2021 May;71((3)):209–49. - PubMed
-
- Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2017. CA Cancer J Clin. 2017;67((1)):7–30. - PubMed
-
- Zhou Q, Chen XY, Yang ZM, Wu YL. The changing landscape of clinical trial and approval processes in China. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2017 Sep;14((9)):577–83. - PubMed
-
- National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. Available from: https://www.nccn.org.
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources