Definitions, measurement, and reporting of progression-free survival in randomized clinical trials and observational studies of patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer treated with immunotherapy: a scoping review

M.V. Verschueren , V.P. Tassopoulou , R. Visscher , J. Schuurkamp , B.J.M. Peters , M. Koopman , E.M.W. van de Garde , A.C.G. Egberts , L.T. Bloem
{"title":"Definitions, measurement, and reporting of progression-free survival in randomized clinical trials and observational studies of patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer treated with immunotherapy: a scoping review","authors":"M.V. Verschueren ,&nbsp;V.P. Tassopoulou ,&nbsp;R. Visscher ,&nbsp;J. Schuurkamp ,&nbsp;B.J.M. Peters ,&nbsp;M. Koopman ,&nbsp;E.M.W. van de Garde ,&nbsp;A.C.G. Egberts ,&nbsp;L.T. Bloem","doi":"10.1016/j.esmorw.2025.100118","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Evidence from observational studies is increasingly used in oncology to complement evidence from clinical trials. Commonly used endpoints to evaluate oncology medicines are overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). However, comparing PFS across observational studies and with clinical trials can be challenging due to differences in its definition and measurement. This scoping review investigated how PFS was defined, measured, and reported in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and observational studies of patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with immunotherapy.</div></div><div><h3>Materials and methods</h3><div>This scoping review included RCTs and observational studies that measured PFS in advanced NSCLC patients treated with immunotherapy. ASReview, an open-source artificial intelligence-assisted tool, was used to screen and prioritize relevant studies from records identified from PubMed and Embase between 2012 and 2023. Information on study characteristics, PFS definitions, and measurements was extracted.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Forty RCTs and 144 observational studies were included. Most RCTs were conducted across multiple continents (70%), while most observational studies were conducted in Asia (62%). In contrast to RCTs, many observational studies lacked reporting on the end date of PFS measurement (69%), the type of radiological imaging (59%), and the imaging reviewer (78%). For observational studies that did report on PFS definitions and measurements, these often differed from those in RCTs, particularly regarding event definitions, the start and stop dates for PFS measurement, and tumor assessment schedules.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>In contrast to RCTs, observational studies often lack reporting on PFS definitions and measurements, and if reported, they differ across observational studies and between them and RCTs. Since observational studies are important for complementing evidence, aligning PFS definition and measurement criteria with those used in RCTs, along with detailed reporting, is needed. However, some variability in PFS measurement characteristics is unavoidable, and therefore, PFS estimates from observational studies should be interpreted critically and carefully.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":100491,"journal":{"name":"ESMO Real World Data and Digital Oncology","volume":"7 ","pages":"Article 100118"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ESMO Real World Data and Digital Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949820125000074","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Evidence from observational studies is increasingly used in oncology to complement evidence from clinical trials. Commonly used endpoints to evaluate oncology medicines are overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). However, comparing PFS across observational studies and with clinical trials can be challenging due to differences in its definition and measurement. This scoping review investigated how PFS was defined, measured, and reported in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and observational studies of patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with immunotherapy.

Materials and methods

This scoping review included RCTs and observational studies that measured PFS in advanced NSCLC patients treated with immunotherapy. ASReview, an open-source artificial intelligence-assisted tool, was used to screen and prioritize relevant studies from records identified from PubMed and Embase between 2012 and 2023. Information on study characteristics, PFS definitions, and measurements was extracted.

Results

Forty RCTs and 144 observational studies were included. Most RCTs were conducted across multiple continents (70%), while most observational studies were conducted in Asia (62%). In contrast to RCTs, many observational studies lacked reporting on the end date of PFS measurement (69%), the type of radiological imaging (59%), and the imaging reviewer (78%). For observational studies that did report on PFS definitions and measurements, these often differed from those in RCTs, particularly regarding event definitions, the start and stop dates for PFS measurement, and tumor assessment schedules.

Conclusions

In contrast to RCTs, observational studies often lack reporting on PFS definitions and measurements, and if reported, they differ across observational studies and between them and RCTs. Since observational studies are important for complementing evidence, aligning PFS definition and measurement criteria with those used in RCTs, along with detailed reporting, is needed. However, some variability in PFS measurement characteristics is unavoidable, and therefore, PFS estimates from observational studies should be interpreted critically and carefully.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在接受免疫治疗的晚期非小细胞肺癌患者的随机临床试验和观察性研究中,无进展生存期的定义、测量和报告:范围综述
观察性研究的证据越来越多地用于肿瘤学,以补充临床试验的证据。评估肿瘤药物的常用终点是总生存期(OS)和无进展生存期(PFS)。然而,在观察性研究和临床试验中比较PFS可能具有挑战性,因为其定义和测量方法存在差异。本综述调查了免疫治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)患者的随机临床试验(rct)和观察性研究中PFS的定义、测量和报告。材料和方法本综述纳入了随机对照试验和观察性研究,这些研究测量了接受免疫治疗的晚期NSCLC患者的PFS。ASReview是一个开源的人工智能辅助工具,用于筛选2012年至2023年间PubMed和Embase记录中的相关研究并对其进行优先排序。提取有关研究特征、PFS定义和测量的信息。结果共纳入40项随机对照试验和144项观察性研究。大多数随机对照试验在多个大洲进行(70%),而大多数观察性研究在亚洲进行(62%)。与rct相比,许多观察性研究缺乏PFS测量结束日期(69%)、放射成像类型(59%)和成像审稿人(78%)的报告。对于报告PFS定义和测量的观察性研究,这些研究通常与随机对照试验不同,特别是在事件定义、PFS测量的开始和停止日期以及肿瘤评估时间表方面。结论:与随机对照试验相比,观察性研究往往缺乏PFS定义和测量的报告,即使报告了,观察性研究之间以及它们与随机对照试验之间的数据也存在差异。由于观察性研究对于补充证据很重要,因此需要将PFS的定义和测量标准与随机对照试验中使用的定义和测量标准相一致,并提供详细的报告。然而,PFS测量特征的一些可变性是不可避免的,因此,从观察性研究中得出的PFS估计值应该得到严格和仔细的解释。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Empathic and agentic artificial intelligence in nursing: perspectives on a human-centered framework for cancer care navigation in the United States AI for clinical trials in oncology Evaluating the statistical utility and information loss in the transformation of a real-world oncology database from CDISC-SDTM to OMOP-CDM Balancing clinical relevance, legal boundaries, and technological solutions: a case-based analysis of secondary use of electronic health records in Sweden Ovarian cancer recurrence prediction: comparing confirmatory to real-world predictors with machine learning
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1