MULTIPLE TREATMENT CHOICES:
Download
1 / 53

Azienda ULSS 13 – Mirano VE - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 187 Views
  • Uploaded on

MULTIPLE TREATMENT CHOICES: ARE THEY EQUALLY ( cost ) EFFECTIVE?. Giovanni L. Pappagallo ([email protected]). Azienda ULSS 13 – Mirano VE. Dipartimento di Scienze Mediche U.O.C. di Oncologia & Ematologia Oncologica. Ufficio di Epidemiologia & Sperimentazioni Cliniche.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' Azienda ULSS 13 – Mirano VE' - chana


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

MULTIPLE TREATMENT CHOICES:

ARE THEY EQUALLY

(cost) EFFECTIVE?

Giovanni L. Pappagallo

([email protected])

Azienda ULSS 13 – Mirano VE

Dipartimento di Scienze Mediche

U.O.C. di Oncologia & Ematologia Oncologica

Ufficio di Epidemiologia & Sperimentazioni Cliniche


Your treatment choice
YOUR TREATMENT CHOICE…

Statistical Significance

vs

Clinical Significance

Registrative Studies

vs

Therapeutic Strategies

Controlling

the Cost of Innovative

Cancer Therapeutics


Your treatment choice1
YOUR TREATMENT CHOICE…

Statistical Significance

vs

Clinical Significance

RegistrativeStudies

vs

TherapeuticStrategies

Controlling

the Costof Innovative

CancerTherapeutics




Poor clinical significance when
PoorClinicalSignificancewhen

PossibleClinicalSignificancealsowhen

P<0.05

  • Earlytermination

  • Overpowering

  • Inadequatecontrolgroup

  • Inadequate (?) primaryendpoint

  • Subgroupanalysis

  • P≥0.05

  • Underpowering

  • Inadequate(?) patientselection






target Δ of

HERA trial:

RRR 23%

HR 0.54

(95%CL 0.43-0.67)

Trastuzumab

better

Control

better

J Slutsman, ASCO 2005


HR 0.62

(95%CL

0.41-0.95)

target Δ of

CALGB 9633:

RRR 33%

CarboTaxol

better

Control

better

J Slutsman, ASCO 2005


Poor clinical significance when1
PoorClinicalSignificancewhen

PossibleClinicalSignificancealsowhen

P<0.05

  • Earlytermination

  • Overpowering

  • Inadequatecontrolgroup

  • Inadequate (?) primaryendpoint

  • Subgroupanalysis

  • P≥0.05

  • Underpowering

  • Inadequate(?) patientselection


Target Δ: HR erlotinib:placebo = 0.75 (2 months OS improvement)

Analysis after 381 events (450 patients; α 5%, power 80%)

Analysis after 486 events (569 patients)

Actual difference:

0.33 months (10 days)


Target Δ: HR cetuximab:placebo = 0.80 (2.5 months OS improvement)

Analysis after 845 events (1100 patients; α 5%, power 90%)

Analysis after ??? events (1125 patients)

Actual difference:

1.2 months


Poor clinical significance when2
PoorClinicalSignificancewhen

PossibleClinicalSignificancealsowhen

P<0.05

  • Earlytermination

  • Overpowering

  • Inadequatecontrolgroup

  • Inadequate (?) primaryendpoint

  • Subgroupanalysis

  • P≥0.05

  • Underpowering

  • Inadequate(?) patientselection


“Standard” therapy?

Equipoise?


Equipoise?

“Standard” therapy?


Equipoise?

New “standard”?

“Standard” therapy?



Poor clinical significance when3
PoorClinicalSignificancewhen

PossibleClinicalSignificancealsowhen

P<0.05

  • Earlytermination

  • Overpowering

  • Inadequatecontrolgroup

  • Inadequate (?) primaryendpoint

  • Subgroupanalysis

  • P≥0.05

  • Underpowering

  • Inadequate(?) patientselection



VALIDATION OF SURROGATE ENDPOINTS:“FULL CAPTURE OF EFFECT”

Effect of treatment on surrogate

Effect of surrogate on true endpoint

S

T

Trt

Effect of treatment on trueendpoint

must befullycaptured by surrogate

Prentice, Statist Med 1989;8:431.


VALIDATION OF SURROGATE ENDPOINTS:“FULL CAPTURE OF EFFECT”

Effect of treatment on surrogate

Effect of surrogate on true endpoint

S

T

Trt

Effect of treatment on trueendpoint

must befullycaptured by surrogate

Prentice, Statist Med 1989;8:431.


Poor clinical significance when4
PoorClinicalSignificancewhen

PossibleClinicalSignificancealsowhen

  • P≥0.05

  • Underpowering

  • Inadequate(?) patientselection

P<0.05

  • Earlytermination

  • Overpowering

  • Inadequatecontrolgroup

  • Inadequate (?) primaryendpoint

  • Subgroupanalysis






Poor clinical significance when5
PoorClinicalSignificancewhen

PossibleClinicalSignificancealsowhen

P<0.05

  • Earlytermination

  • Overpowering

  • Inadequatecontrolgroup

  • Inadequate (?) primaryendpoint

  • Subgroupanalysis

  • P≥0.05

  • Underpowering

  • Inadequate(?) patientselection


Poor clinical significance when6
PoorClinicalSignificancewhen

PossibleClinicalSignificancealsowhen

P<0.05

  • Earlytermination

  • Overpowering

  • Inadequatecontrolgroup

  • Inadequate (?) primaryendpoint

  • Subgroupanalysis

  • P≥0.05

  • Underpowering

  • Inadequate(?) patientselection



Competing causes of mortality

Breast-cancer deaths

Other deaths

Competing causes of mortality

Age ≥50 years and ER+

Probability

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0.0

0

5

10

15

Time from diagnosis (years)

ER+, oestrogen receptor-positive

Hanrahan et al. J Clin Oncol 2007; 25: 4952-60



Your treatment choice2
YOUR TREATMENT CHOICE…

StatisticalSignificance

vs

ClinicalSignificance

Registrative Studies

vs

Therapeutic Strategies

Controlling

the Cost of Innovative

Cancer Therapeutics


Maintenance therapy in advanced nsclc proof of principle or ready to use strategy
MAINTENANCE THERAPY IN ADVANCED NSCLC: PROOF OF PRINCIPLEOR READY-TO-USE STRATEGY?

Only 19% of placebo ptsreceivedPemetrexed at anytime

Only 16% of placebo ptsreceivedErlotinib at anytime

C. Belani, ASCO 2009

F. Cappuzzo, WCLC 2009


One of the best 1 st line

The Best 2ndLine

(one of)The Best 1st Line


Your treatment choice3
YOUR TREATMENT CHOICE…

StatisticalSignificance

vs

ClinicalSignificance

RegistrativeStudies

vs

TherapeuticStrategies

Controlling

the Cost of Innovative

Cancer Therapeutics


Your treatment choice4
YOUR TREATMENT CHOICE…

StatisticalSignificance

vs

ClinicalSignificance

RegistrativeStudies

vs

TherapeuticStrategies

Controlling

the Cost of Innovative

Cancer Therapeutics


Your treatment choice5
YOUR TREATMENT CHOICE…

StatisticalSignificance

vs

ClinicalSignificance

RegistrativeStudies

vs

TherapeuticStrategies

Controlling

the Costof Innovative

CancerTherapeutics


Thank you for your attention

ThankYouforYourAttention!


ad