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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

TABLES AND FIGURESFigure 1: Example of health states in a simple Markov model .................................................................... 8Figure 2: Identification of included studies............................................................................................... 12Table 1: Characteristics of included papers .............................................................................................. 14Table 2: Methods used to analyse the relationship between PFS/ TTP and OS .......................................... 16Table 3: Subgroups considered ................................................................................................................ 27Table 4: Summary of results by tumour type and level of evidence........................................................... 306
1. INTRODUCTION1.1. BACKGROUNDProgression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) are commonly used endpoints inrandomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies of treatments for metastatic disease insolid tumour cancers (e.g. breast, lung, prostate, colorectal). Within an RCT setting, OS is measuredas the time from randomisation to death due to any cause and PFS is measured as the time fromrandomisation to either documented disease progression or death. Disease progression in solidtumours may involve an increase in the size of existing lesions or the appearance of new lesions. 1 OSis unambiguous as the true time of death can be measured accurately. PFS is associated with morecomplex issues as disease progression is typically measured relative to disease status at the start oftreatment; where treatment involves more than one line of therapy, the time from treatment initiationto further progression may be considered the “progression-free” period for that line of therapy. Someclinical study publications report time-to-progression (TTP) rather than or alongside PFS, thedifference being that in TTP, patients are censored at the point of death. In patients who havedocumented progression prior to death, post-progression survival (PPS) is defined as the time fromprogression to death. It therefore provides an indirect measure of OS in patients with a known TTP.1.2. RELEVANCE OF PFS/TTP AND OS OUTCOMES TO COST-EFFECTIVENESSANALYSISBoth OS and PFS/TTP are time-to-event outcomes and are usually represented in publications andtrial reports using Kaplan Meier survival curves. Health economic models often use this informationas a means of defining disease- and treatment-related health states. Commonly, these differentiatebetween a progression-free period and a post-progression period. Figure 1 shows a simple Markovtypestructure with separate health states for patients before and after progression. This definition ofhealth states is often also useful for discriminating between different treatment periods – when apatient’s tumour progresses they may move on to receive another line of active treatment oralternatively they may receive best supportive care. Therefore, treatment costs are likely to changewhen moving from one health state to another following disease progression. Health states may alsodiffer in terms of health-related quality of life, meaning that the quality adjusted life years (QALYs)gained associated with spending a fixed time in any one state will vary.7
Page 1 and 2: A REVIEW OF STUDIES EXAMINING THE R
Page 3 and 4: EXECUTIVE SUMMARYIntroductionProgre
Page 5: CONTENTS1. INTRODUCTION ...........
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 30 and 31: Table 4: Summary of results by tumo
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?