Progression‐free survival in oncological clinical studies: Assessment time bias and methods for its correction

Progression‐free survival (PFS) is a frequently used endpoint in oncological clinical studies. In case of PFS, potential events are progression and death. Progressions are usually observed delayed as they can be diagnosed not before the next study visit. For this reason potential bias of treatment e...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Pharmaceutical statistics : the journal of the pharmaceutical industry 2021-07, Vol.20 (4), p.864-878
Hauptverfasser: Miltenberger, Robert, Götte, Heiko, Schüler, Armin, Jahn‐Eimermacher, Antje
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 878
container_issue 4
container_start_page 864
container_title Pharmaceutical statistics : the journal of the pharmaceutical industry
container_volume 20
creator Miltenberger, Robert
Götte, Heiko
Schüler, Armin
Jahn‐Eimermacher, Antje
description Progression‐free survival (PFS) is a frequently used endpoint in oncological clinical studies. In case of PFS, potential events are progression and death. Progressions are usually observed delayed as they can be diagnosed not before the next study visit. For this reason potential bias of treatment effect estimates for progression‐free survival is a concern. In randomized trials and for relative treatment effects measures like hazard ratios, bias‐correcting methods are not necessarily required or have been proposed before. However, less is known on cross‐trial comparisons of absolute outcome measures like median survival times. This paper proposes a new method for correcting the assessment time bias of progression‐free survival estimates to allow a fair cross‐trial comparison of median PFS. Using median PFS for example, the presented method approximates the unknown posterior distribution by a Bayesian approach based on simulations. It is shown that the proposed method leads to a substantial reduction of bias as compared to estimates derived from maximum likelihood or Kaplan–Meier estimates. Bias could be reduced by more than 90% over a broad range of considered situations differing in assessment times and underlying distributions. By coverage probabilities of at least 94% based on the credibility interval of the posterior distribution the resulting parameters hold common confidence levels. In summary, the proposed approach is shown to be useful for a cross‐trial comparison of median PFS.
doi_str_mv 10.1002/pst.2115
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2507150545</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2507150545</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3495-2d7b771ae76472151eff3cc8c3779f6de09f96fdde084e7c2f15502faa09beb3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kctKxDAUhoMozngBn0ACbtxUk6aZtO4G8QaCA86-pOmJRtpmzGlH3PkIPqNPYsYrCK7yB758OclPyB5nR5yx9HiB_VHKuVwjYy5FkfAJT9d_MstGZAvxgTGu8kJukpEQKhdM8TFZzIK_C4DofPf28moDAMUhLN1SN9R11HfGN_7Ombg1jes-AvZD7QBP6BQxHm2h62nvWqCV00h1V9MW-ntfI7U-UNcjNT4EMH28ZIdsWN0g7H6t22R-fjY_vUyuby6uTqfXiRFZIZO0VpVSXIOaZCrlkoO1wpjcCKUKO6mBFbaY2DqGPANlUsulZKnVmhUVVGKbHH5qF8E_DoB92To00DS6Az9gmcr4fMlkJiN68Ad98EPo4nCRWiF5kYtfoQkeMYAtF8G1OjyXnJWrEspYQrkqIaL7X8KhaqH-Ab9_PQLJJ_DkGnj-V1TObucfwncVD5Mp</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2550548983</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Progression‐free survival in oncological clinical studies: Assessment time bias and methods for its correction</title><source>Access via Wiley Online Library</source><creator>Miltenberger, Robert ; Götte, Heiko ; Schüler, Armin ; Jahn‐Eimermacher, Antje</creator><creatorcontrib>Miltenberger, Robert ; Götte, Heiko ; Schüler, Armin ; Jahn‐Eimermacher, Antje</creatorcontrib><description>Progression‐free survival (PFS) is a frequently used endpoint in oncological clinical studies. In case of PFS, potential events are progression and death. Progressions are usually observed delayed as they can be diagnosed not before the next study visit. For this reason potential bias of treatment effect estimates for progression‐free survival is a concern. In randomized trials and for relative treatment effects measures like hazard ratios, bias‐correcting methods are not necessarily required or have been proposed before. However, less is known on cross‐trial comparisons of absolute outcome measures like median survival times. This paper proposes a new method for correcting the assessment time bias of progression‐free survival estimates to allow a fair cross‐trial comparison of median PFS. Using median PFS for example, the presented method approximates the unknown posterior distribution by a Bayesian approach based on simulations. It is shown that the proposed method leads to a substantial reduction of bias as compared to estimates derived from maximum likelihood or Kaplan–Meier estimates. Bias could be reduced by more than 90% over a broad range of considered situations differing in assessment times and underlying distributions. By coverage probabilities of at least 94% based on the credibility interval of the posterior distribution the resulting parameters hold common confidence levels. In summary, the proposed approach is shown to be useful for a cross‐trial comparison of median PFS.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1539-1604</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1539-1612</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/pst.2115</identifier><identifier>PMID: 33783071</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Chichester, UK: John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</publisher><subject>approximate Bayesian computation ; Bias ; bias correction ; interval censoring ; progression‐free survival ; Weibull distribution</subject><ispartof>Pharmaceutical statistics : the journal of the pharmaceutical industry, 2021-07, Vol.20 (4), p.864-878</ispartof><rights>2021 The Authors. published by John Wiley &amp; Sons Ltd.</rights><rights>2021 The Authors. Pharmaceutical Statistics published by John Wiley &amp; Sons Ltd.</rights><rights>2021. This article is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3495-2d7b771ae76472151eff3cc8c3779f6de09f96fdde084e7c2f15502faa09beb3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3495-2d7b771ae76472151eff3cc8c3779f6de09f96fdde084e7c2f15502faa09beb3</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-6305-4466 ; 0000-0002-7385-1151</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002%2Fpst.2115$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002%2Fpst.2115$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1417,27924,27925,45574,45575</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33783071$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Miltenberger, Robert</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Götte, Heiko</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schüler, Armin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jahn‐Eimermacher, Antje</creatorcontrib><title>Progression‐free survival in oncological clinical studies: Assessment time bias and methods for its correction</title><title>Pharmaceutical statistics : the journal of the pharmaceutical industry</title><addtitle>Pharm Stat</addtitle><description>Progression‐free survival (PFS) is a frequently used endpoint in oncological clinical studies. In case of PFS, potential events are progression and death. Progressions are usually observed delayed as they can be diagnosed not before the next study visit. For this reason potential bias of treatment effect estimates for progression‐free survival is a concern. In randomized trials and for relative treatment effects measures like hazard ratios, bias‐correcting methods are not necessarily required or have been proposed before. However, less is known on cross‐trial comparisons of absolute outcome measures like median survival times. This paper proposes a new method for correcting the assessment time bias of progression‐free survival estimates to allow a fair cross‐trial comparison of median PFS. Using median PFS for example, the presented method approximates the unknown posterior distribution by a Bayesian approach based on simulations. It is shown that the proposed method leads to a substantial reduction of bias as compared to estimates derived from maximum likelihood or Kaplan–Meier estimates. Bias could be reduced by more than 90% over a broad range of considered situations differing in assessment times and underlying distributions. By coverage probabilities of at least 94% based on the credibility interval of the posterior distribution the resulting parameters hold common confidence levels. In summary, the proposed approach is shown to be useful for a cross‐trial comparison of median PFS.</description><subject>approximate Bayesian computation</subject><subject>Bias</subject><subject>bias correction</subject><subject>interval censoring</subject><subject>progression‐free survival</subject><subject>Weibull distribution</subject><issn>1539-1604</issn><issn>1539-1612</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>24P</sourceid><sourceid>WIN</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kctKxDAUhoMozngBn0ACbtxUk6aZtO4G8QaCA86-pOmJRtpmzGlH3PkIPqNPYsYrCK7yB758OclPyB5nR5yx9HiB_VHKuVwjYy5FkfAJT9d_MstGZAvxgTGu8kJukpEQKhdM8TFZzIK_C4DofPf28moDAMUhLN1SN9R11HfGN_7Ombg1jes-AvZD7QBP6BQxHm2h62nvWqCV00h1V9MW-ntfI7U-UNcjNT4EMH28ZIdsWN0g7H6t22R-fjY_vUyuby6uTqfXiRFZIZO0VpVSXIOaZCrlkoO1wpjcCKUKO6mBFbaY2DqGPANlUsulZKnVmhUVVGKbHH5qF8E_DoB92To00DS6Az9gmcr4fMlkJiN68Ad98EPo4nCRWiF5kYtfoQkeMYAtF8G1OjyXnJWrEspYQrkqIaL7X8KhaqH-Ab9_PQLJJ_DkGnj-V1TObucfwncVD5Mp</recordid><startdate>202107</startdate><enddate>202107</enddate><creator>Miltenberger, Robert</creator><creator>Götte, Heiko</creator><creator>Schüler, Armin</creator><creator>Jahn‐Eimermacher, Antje</creator><general>John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</general><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>24P</scope><scope>WIN</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6305-4466</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7385-1151</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202107</creationdate><title>Progression‐free survival in oncological clinical studies: Assessment time bias and methods for its correction</title><author>Miltenberger, Robert ; Götte, Heiko ; Schüler, Armin ; Jahn‐Eimermacher, Antje</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3495-2d7b771ae76472151eff3cc8c3779f6de09f96fdde084e7c2f15502faa09beb3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>approximate Bayesian computation</topic><topic>Bias</topic><topic>bias correction</topic><topic>interval censoring</topic><topic>progression‐free survival</topic><topic>Weibull distribution</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Miltenberger, Robert</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Götte, Heiko</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schüler, Armin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jahn‐Eimermacher, Antje</creatorcontrib><collection>Wiley Online Library (Open Access Collection)</collection><collection>Wiley Free Content</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Pharmaceutical statistics : the journal of the pharmaceutical industry</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Miltenberger, Robert</au><au>Götte, Heiko</au><au>Schüler, Armin</au><au>Jahn‐Eimermacher, Antje</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Progression‐free survival in oncological clinical studies: Assessment time bias and methods for its correction</atitle><jtitle>Pharmaceutical statistics : the journal of the pharmaceutical industry</jtitle><addtitle>Pharm Stat</addtitle><date>2021-07</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>20</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>864</spage><epage>878</epage><pages>864-878</pages><issn>1539-1604</issn><eissn>1539-1612</eissn><abstract>Progression‐free survival (PFS) is a frequently used endpoint in oncological clinical studies. In case of PFS, potential events are progression and death. Progressions are usually observed delayed as they can be diagnosed not before the next study visit. For this reason potential bias of treatment effect estimates for progression‐free survival is a concern. In randomized trials and for relative treatment effects measures like hazard ratios, bias‐correcting methods are not necessarily required or have been proposed before. However, less is known on cross‐trial comparisons of absolute outcome measures like median survival times. This paper proposes a new method for correcting the assessment time bias of progression‐free survival estimates to allow a fair cross‐trial comparison of median PFS. Using median PFS for example, the presented method approximates the unknown posterior distribution by a Bayesian approach based on simulations. It is shown that the proposed method leads to a substantial reduction of bias as compared to estimates derived from maximum likelihood or Kaplan–Meier estimates. Bias could be reduced by more than 90% over a broad range of considered situations differing in assessment times and underlying distributions. By coverage probabilities of at least 94% based on the credibility interval of the posterior distribution the resulting parameters hold common confidence levels. In summary, the proposed approach is shown to be useful for a cross‐trial comparison of median PFS.</abstract><cop>Chichester, UK</cop><pub>John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</pub><pmid>33783071</pmid><doi>10.1002/pst.2115</doi><tpages>15</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6305-4466</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7385-1151</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1539-1604
ispartof Pharmaceutical statistics : the journal of the pharmaceutical industry, 2021-07, Vol.20 (4), p.864-878
issn 1539-1604
1539-1612
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2507150545
source Access via Wiley Online Library
subjects approximate Bayesian computation
Bias
bias correction
interval censoring
progression‐free survival
Weibull distribution
title Progression‐free survival in oncological clinical studies: Assessment time bias and methods for its correction
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-21T10%3A29%3A37IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Progression%E2%80%90free%20survival%20in%20oncological%20clinical%20studies:%20Assessment%20time%20bias%20and%20methods%20for%20its%20correction&rft.jtitle=Pharmaceutical%20statistics%20:%20the%20journal%20of%20the%20pharmaceutical%20industry&rft.au=Miltenberger,%20Robert&rft.date=2021-07&rft.volume=20&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=864&rft.epage=878&rft.pages=864-878&rft.issn=1539-1604&rft.eissn=1539-1612&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/pst.2115&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2507150545%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2550548983&rft_id=info:pmid/33783071&rfr_iscdi=true