Is there a role for older-patient-specific cancer clinical trials? A pooled analysis of 2277 older patients in adjuvant breast cancer trials (Alliance A151715).

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 10034-10034 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dyda Dao ◽  
Tyler Zemla ◽  
Aminah Jatoi ◽  
Rachel A. Freedman ◽  
Arti Hurria ◽  
...  
2019 ◽  
Vol 24 (6) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dyda Dao ◽  
Tyler Zemla ◽  
Aminah Jatoi ◽  
Rachel A. Freedman ◽  
Arti Hurria ◽  
...  

2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (15) ◽  
pp. 2127-2132 ◽  
Author(s):  
Clifford A. Hudis ◽  
William E. Barlow ◽  
Joseph P. Costantino ◽  
Robert J. Gray ◽  
Kathleen I. Pritchard ◽  
...  

Purpose Standardized definitions of breast cancer clinical trial end points must be adopted to permit the consistent interpretation and analysis of breast cancer clinical trials and to facilitate cross-trial comparisons and meta-analyses. Standardizing terms will allow for uniformity in data collection across studies, which will optimize clinical trial utility and efficiency. A given end point term (eg, overall survival) used in a breast cancer trial should always encompass the same set of events (eg, death attributable to breast cancer, death attributable to cause other than breast cancer, death from unknown cause), and, in turn, each event within that end point should be commonly defined across end points and studies. Methods A panel of experts in breast cancer clinical trials representing medical oncology, biostatistics, and correlative science convened to formulate standard definitions and address the confusion that nonstandard definitions of widely used end point terms for a breast cancer clinical trial can generate. We propose standard definitions for efficacy end points and events in early-stage adjuvant breast cancer clinical trials. In some cases, it is expected that the standard end points may not address a specific trial question, so that modified or customized end points would need to be prospectively defined and consistently used. Conclusion The use of the proposed common end point definitions will facilitate interpretation of trial outcomes. This approach may be adopted to develop standard outcome definitions for use in trials involving other cancer sites.


2010 ◽  
Vol 17 (8) ◽  
pp. 1989-1994 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lee G. Wilke ◽  
Karla V. Ballman ◽  
Linda M. McCall ◽  
Armando E. Giuliano ◽  
Pat W. Whitworth ◽  
...  

2011 ◽  
Vol 12 (12) ◽  
pp. 1162-1168 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sherene Loi ◽  
W Fraser Symmans ◽  
John MS Bartlett ◽  
Debora Fumagalli ◽  
Laura Van't Veer ◽  
...  

2005 ◽  
Vol 91 (4) ◽  
pp. 373-379 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francesco Perrone ◽  
Maurizio Marangolo ◽  
Francesco Di Costanzo ◽  
Giuseppe Colucci ◽  
Lazzaro Repetto ◽  
...  

Background Clinical trials with non-profit promoters are frequently performed in oncology and represent a highly valuable source of information. Methods To describe the costs of insurance policies and their determinants, data were collected from 12 Italian non-profit promoters of cancer trials. The cost of policies was expressed as per-patient premium. Results Sixty-two quotations issued by only two companies were collected, relative to 44 trials proposed for quotation between December 1998 and February 2003. Only the date of quotation was significantly associated with the cost (P = 0.0003) of quotations by Company A for policies with a deductible, with cost increasing over time. Date of quotation (P = 0.0002), sample size (P = 0.008) and number of study arms (P = 0.02) were independently associated with the cost of no-deductible policies quoted by Company A. Only the number of study arms was significantly associated with cost (P = 0.0001) in no-deductible policies quoted by Company B. Conclusion There is insufficient competition among companies for insurance of cancer trials with non-profit promoters. Many variables that affect the trial risk profile from a clinical perspective are not associated with insurance cost. Date of quotation is among the strongest determinants of the cost, which has sharply increased over time. This trend may become a serious problem for non-profit promoters of cancer clinical trials.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document