PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
September 30, 2024JCO Precision Oncology11 citations

Evidenced-Based Prior for Estimating the Treatment Effect of Phase III Randomized Trials in Oncology

View Full Paper
ASAlexander D. SherryPMPavlos MsaouelGKGabrielle S. Kupferman

Key Points

Key points are not available for this paper at this time.

Abstract

PURPOSE The primary results of phase III oncology trials may be challenging to interpret, given that results are generally based on P value thresholds. The probability of whether a treatment is beneficial, although more intuitive, is not usually provided. Here, we developed and released a user-friendly tool that calculates the probability of treatment benefit using trial summary statistics. METHODS We curated 415 phase III randomized trials enrolling 338,600 patients published between 2004 and 2020. A phase III prior probability distribution for the treatment effect was developed on the basis of a three-component zero-mean mixture distribution of the observed z-scores. Using this prior, we computed the probability of clinically meaningful benefit (hazard ratio HR <0.8). The distribution of signal-to-noise ratios and power of phase III oncology trials were compared with that of 23,551 randomized trials from the Cochrane Database. RESULTS The signal-to-noise ratios of phase III oncology trials tended to be much larger than randomized trials from the Cochrane Database. Still, the median power of phase III oncology trials was only 49% (IQR, 14%-95%), and the power was <80% in 65% of trials. Using the phase III oncology-specific prior, only 53% of trials claiming superiority (114 of 216) had a ≥90% probability of clinically meaningful benefits. Conversely, the probability that the experimental arm was superior to the control arm (HR <1) exceeded 90% in 17% of trials interpreted as having no benefit (34 of 199). CONCLUSION By enabling computation of contextual probabilities for the treatment effect from summary statistics, our robust, highly practical tool, now posted on a user-friendly webpage, can aid the wider oncology community in the interpretation of phase III trials.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Sherry et al. (2024) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/68e56386e2b3180350f001dehttps://doi.org/10.1200/po.24.00363
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1An Evidenced-Based Prior for Estimating the Treatment Effect of Phase III Randomized Trials in Oncology2024 · 9 citations
  2. 2Interpreting Treatment Effects Using Posterior Probabilities: A Bayesian Reanalysis of 230 Phase III Oncology Trials.2026
  3. 3Towards Treatment Effect Interpretability: A Bayesian Re-analysis of 194,129 Patient Outcomes Across 230 Oncology Trials2024 · 3 citations
  4. 4Tumor‐Specific Success Probabilities and Factors Associated With Phase <scp>III</scp> Trials in Oncology Drug Development2026
  5. 5Increasing Power in Phase III Oncology Trials With Multivariable Regression: An Empirical Assessment of 535 Primary End Point Analyses2024 · 8 citations