The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s11523-016-0472-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
If patients in oncology trials receive subsequent therapy, standard intention-to-treat (ITT) analyses may inaccurately estimate the overall survival (OS) effect of the investigational product. In this context, a post-hoc analysis of the phase 3 PREVAIL study was performed with the aim to compare enzalutamide with placebo in terms of OS, adjusting for potential confounding from switching to antineoplastic therapies that are not part of standard metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) treatment pathways in some jurisdictions.
The PREVAIL study, which included 1717 chemotherapy-naïve men with mCRPC randomized to treatment with enzalutamide 160 mg/day or placebo, was stopped after a planned interim survival analysis revealed a benefit in favor of enzalutamide. Data from this cutoff point were confounded by switching from both arms and so were evaluated in terms of OS using two switching adjustment methods: the two-stage accelerated failure time model (two-stage method) and inverse probability of censoring weights (IPCW).
Following adjustment for switching to nonstandard antineoplastic therapies by 14.8 (129/872 patients) and 21.3% (180/845 patients) of patients initially randomized to enzalutamide and placebo, respectively, the two-stage and IPCW methods both resulted in numerical reductions in the hazard ratio (HR) for OS [HR 0.66, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.57–0.81 and HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.52–0.75, respectively] for enzalutamide compared to placebo versus the unadjusted ITT analysis (HR 0.71, 95% CI 0.60–0.84). These results suggest a slightly greater effect of enzalutamide on OS than originally reported.
In the PREVAIL study, switching to nonstandard antineoplastic mCRPC therapies resulted in the ITT analysis of primary data underestimating the benefit of enzalutamide on OS.
Online Resource 1 (DOCX 39 kb)11523_2016_472_MOESM1_ESM.docx
Online Resource 2 (DOCX 30 kb)11523_2016_472_MOESM2_ESM.docx
Online Resource 3 (DOCX 30 kb)11523_2016_472_MOESM3_ESM.docx
Online Resource 4 (DOCX 31 kb)11523_2016_472_MOESM4_ESM.docx
Online Resource 5 (DOCX 32 kb)11523_2016_472_MOESM5_ESM.docx
Online Resource 6 (DOCX 29 kb)11523_2016_472_MOESM6_ESM.docx
Online Resource 7 (DOCX 28 kb)11523_2016_472_MOESM7_ESM.docx
Online Resource 8 (DOCX 27 kb)11523_2016_472_MOESM8_ESM.docx
Latimer NR, Abrams KR, Lambert PC, et al. Adjusting survival time estimates to account for treatment switching in randomized controlled trials--an economic evaluation context: methods, limitations, and recommendations. Med Decis Mak. 2014;34(3):387–402. CrossRef
Robins JM, Tsiatis AA. Correcting for noncompliance in randomized trials using rank preserving structural failure time models. Commun Stat Theory Methods. 1991;20(8):2609–31. CrossRef
Latimer NR, Abrams K, Lambert P, et al. Adjusting for treatment switching in randomised controlled trials—A simulation study and a simplified two-stage method. Stat Methods Med Res. 2014. doi: 10.1177/0962280214557578
Latimer NR, Abrams KR, Lambert PC, et al. Assessing methods for dealing with treatment switching in clinical trials: A follow-up simulation study. Stat Methods Med Res. 2016. doi: 10.1177/0962280216642264
Astellas Pharma Ltd. Xtandi® (enzalutamide) Summary of Product Characteristics. 2015. Available at: https://www.medicines.org.uk/emc/medicine/27912/SPC/Xtandi+40mg+soft+capsules/. Accessed 3 June 2016.
Astellas Pharma US, Inc. Xtandi® (enzalutamide) Prescribing information. 2015. Available at: http://www.astellas.us/docs/us/12A005-ENZ-WPI.pdf?v=1. Accessed 3 June 2016.
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Guide to the methods of technology appraisal. 2013. Available at: http://www.nice.org.uk/article/pmg9/resources/non-guidance-guide-to-the-methods-of-technology-appraisal-2013-pdf. Accessed Jun 3, 2016.
NICE. Clinical guideline 175. Prostate cancer: diagnosis and treatment. 2014. Available at: http://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg175. Accessed 3 June 2016.
Latimer NR, Abrams KR. NICE DS technical support document 16: Adjusting survival time estimates in the presence of treatment switching. Report by the Decision Support Unit. 2014. Available at: http://www.nicedsu.org.uk/TSD16_Treatment_Switching.pdf. Accessed 3 June 2016.
Beer TM, Armstrong AJ, Sternberg CN, et al. Enzalutamide (ENZA) in men with chemotherapy-Naïve metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC): Final analysis of the phase 3 PREVAIL study. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33[15 Suppl]:abstr 5036.
Robins J, Greenland S. Adjusting for differential rates of prophylaxis therapy for PCP in high- versus low-dose AZT treatment in an AIDS randomized trial. J Am Stat Assoc. 1994;89(427):737–49. CrossRef
NICE. Final appraisal determination—Imatinib for the adjuvant treatment of gastrointestinal stromal tumours (review of NICE technology appraisal guidance 196). 2014. Available at: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ta326/documents/gastrointestinal-stromal-tumours-imatinib-adjuvant-rev-ta196-id696-final-appraisal-determination-document2. Accessed 3 June 2016.
NICE. Final appraisal determination—Crizotinib for previously treated non-small-cell lung cancer associated with an anaplastic lymphoma kinase fusion gene. 2013. Available at: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ta296/documents/lung-cancer-nonsmallcell-anaplastic-lymphoma-kinase-fusion-gene-previously-treated-crizotinib-final-appraisal-determination3. Accessed Jun 3, 2016.
NICE. Technology appraisal guidance [TA219]: Everolimus for the second-line treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma. 2011. Available at: http://guidance.nice.org.uk/TA219. Accessed 3 June 2016.
- Adjusting Overall Survival Estimates after Treatment Switching: a Case Study in Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer
Nicholas R. Latimer
- Springer International Publishing
Neu im Fachgebiet Onkologie
Mail Icon II