Is the Juice Worth the Squeeze? Overall Survival gain per unit treatment time as a metric of clinical benefit of systemic treatment in incurable cancers.
Joseph, N.; Bamunuarachchci, V.; Peiris, V.; Wijesekera, S.; Rajapakse, D.; Gunasekera, S.
Show abstract
IntroductionNovel systemic therapeutic options such as enzyme inhibitors and monoclonal antibodies have transformed the practice of medical oncology in the recent past. However, survival gains remain modest in most cases. Quantifying the magnitude of benefit against financial and non-financial toxicity of treatment is pivotal in deciding treatment. We describe a novel metric which can be used to assess effectiveness novel therapeutics for incurable cancers. MethodsThe median overall survival was divided by the median duration of treatment to obtain the overall survival gain per treatment time which was the primary end-point of the study. This parameter was compared with the European Society of Medical Oncology Magnitude of clinical benefit scale (ESMO-MCBS) score. Spearmans rank correlation coefficient was used to test the association between the novel metric and the ESMO-MCBS scores. ResultsData were available for 30 drugs across 60 indications. The median overall survival per unit treatment time ranged from 0.68 (range 0.2-0.51). Only 18/60 indications had a ratio greater than 1 while 13/60 indications had a ratio less than 0.5. The median treatment duration was not mentioned in 11 indications and median progression free survival was substituted for the analysis. The ESMO-MCBS score was available for 49 of the indications. The Spearmans rank correlation coefficient was 0.44575 and showed a statistically significant association between survival gain per unit treatment time and the ESMO-MCBS score (p = 0.00133). ConclusionsAlong with other metrics, the ratio of survival gain over treatment duration is a useful parameter to assess effectiveness of novel therapeutics in the palliative setting.
Matching journals
The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Trends in Phase II trials for cancer therapies 94%
- Machine learning for prediction of immunotherapy efficacy in non-small cell lung cancer from simple clinical and biological data 93%
- Development of a Metastatic Uveal Melanoma Prognostic risk Score (MUMPS) for use in patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Factors affecting COVID-19 outcomes in cancer patients - A first report from Guys Cancer Centre in London 92%
- An Evaluation of the Efficacy of Preclinical Models of Lung Cancer Drugs 91%
- Meta-Analysis of Adenoviral p53 Gene Therapy Clinical Trials in Recurrent Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma 90%
Similar papers in this journal
- Clinical activity of MAPK targeted therapies in patients with non-V600 BRAF mutant tumors 94%
- Clinical activity of Mitogen-Activated Protein Kinase (MAPK) inhibitors in patients with MAP2K1 (MEK1)-mutated metastatic cancers 93%
- An Evidenced-Based Prior for Estimating the Treatment Effect of Phase III Randomized Trials in Oncology 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- A Core Outcome Set to evaluate the impact of prognostication in people living with advanced cancer: an international consensus study 92%
- Cost-effectiveness of real-world administration of chemotherapy and add-on Viscum album L. therapy compared to chemotherapy alone in the treatment of stage IV NSCLC patients 91%
- First-Line Systemic Treatment Strategies for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma : a cost-effectiveness analysis 91%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.