4.7 Article

Validation of novel imaging methodologies for use as cancer clinical trial end-points

Journal

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER
Volume 45, Issue 2, Pages 290-299

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2008.10.030

Keywords

Surrogate endpoint; Phase II clinical trial; Meta-analysis; Imaging endpoint; RECIST

Categories

Funding

  1. NCI NIH HHS [U01 CA079778, U01 CA079778-11, U10 CA025224, U10 CA025224-30] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE [U01CA079778, U10CA025224] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The success or failure of a clinical trial, of any phase, depends critically on the choice of an appropriate primary end-point. In the setting of phases II and III cancer clinical trials, imaging end-points have historically, and continue presently to play a major role in determining therapeutic efficacy. The primary goal of this paper is to discuss the validation of imaging-based markers as end-points for phase II clinical trials of cancer therapy. Specifically, we outline the issues that must be considered, and the criteria that would need to be satisfied, for an imaging end-point to supplement or potentially replace RECIST-defined tumour status as a phase II clinical trial end-point. The key criteria proposed to judge the utility of a new end-point primarily relate to its ability to accurately and reproducibly predict the eventual phase III end-point for treatment effect, which is usually assessed by a difference between two arms on progression free or overall survival, both at the patient and more importantly at the trial level. As will be demonstrated, the level of evidence required to formally and fully validate a new imaging marker as an appropriate end-point for phase II trials is substantial. In many cases, this level of evidence will only become available by conducting a series of coordinated prospectively designed multicentre clinical trials culminating in a formal meta-analysis. We also include a discussion of situations where flexibility may be required, relative to the ideal rigorous evaluation, to accommodate inevitable real-world feasibility constraints. (C) 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available