A review of studies examining the relationship between progression ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Table 4: Summary of results by tumour type and level of evidence (Elston and Taylor 2009 5 )Tumour typeNumber ofpapersLevel 2 evidence[ Association between surrogate outcome and OS]Colorectal 9,13,14,22,27 5 PFS:ρ for individual outcomes in 1 paper 14 (0.82, p
Non-small celllungExtensive smallcell lung4 9,19,25,26 PFS:R 2 =0.2563 for medians from one paper 25Significant hazard ratios for 8,12,16, 20 and 24 weeks inlandmark analysis. 19TTP: None1 17 PFS:Significant hazard ratios for 2, 4 and 6mths in landmarkanalysis.PFS: NoneTTP:R 2 =0·19; p
Page 1 and 2: A REVIEW OF STUDIES EXAMINING THE R
Page 3 and 4: EXECUTIVE SUMMARYIntroductionProgre
Page 5 and 6: CONTENTS1. INTRODUCTION ...........
Page 7 and 8: 1. INTRODUCTION1.1. BACKGROUNDProgr
Page 9 and 10: equivalent incremental benefit in O
Page 11: 2. REVIEW METHODS2.1. SEARCH STRATE
Page 14 and 15: Table 1: Characteristics of include
Page 16 and 17: Table 2: Methods used to analyse th
Page 18 and 19: Reference Data type Relationships a
Page 20 and 21: Reference Data type Relationships a
Page 22 and 23: 4.2. METHODS IN STUDIES USING INDIV
Page 24 and 25: 5.1. DEFINITION OF TREATMENT EFFECT
Page 26 and 27: 5.3. OTHER MEASURES OF CORRELATION
Page 28 and 29: The slope parameters in the linear
Page 33 and 34: many of the papers included in this
Page 35 and 36: 8. REFERENCES1. Therasse, P., Arbuc
Page 37 and 38: 25. Hotta, K., Kiura, K., Fujiwara,
Page 39 and 40: APPENDIX 2: SEARCH STRATEGIESThe in
Page 41: 38 26 or 27 or 28 or 29 (1206968)39

A review of studies examining the relationship between progression ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?