Subcutaneous progesterone is effective and safe for luteal phase support in IVF: an individual patient data meta-analysis of the phase III trials

Purpose Following the Sorafenib Hepatocellular Carcinoma Assessment Randomized Protocol (SHARP) trial, sorafenib has become the standard of care for patients with advanced unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma, but the relation between survival advantage and disease etiology remains unclear. To address this, we undertook an individual patient data meta-analysis of three large prospective randomized trials in which sorafenib was the control arm. Methods Of a total of 3,256 patients, 1,643 (50%) who received sorafenib were available. The primary end point was overall survival (OS). A Bayesian hierarchical approach for individual patient data meta-analyses was applied using a piecewise exponential model. Results are presented in terms of hazard ratios comparing sorafenib with alternative therapies according to hepatitis C virus (HCV) or hepatitis B virus (HBV) status. Results Hazard ratios show improved OS for sorafenib in patients who are both HBV negative and HCV positive (log [hazard ratio], −0.27; 95% CI, −0.46 to −0.06). Median unadjusted survival is 12.6 (11.15 to 13.8) months for sorafenib and 10.2 (8.88 to 12.2) months for “other” treatments in this subgroup. There was no evidence of improvement in OS for any other patient subgroups defined by HBV and HCV. Results were consistent across all trials with heterogeneity assessed using Cochran’s Q statistic. Conclusion There is consistent evidence that the effect of sorafenib on OS is dependent on patients’ hepatitis status. There is an improved OS for patients negative for HBV and positive for HCV when treated with sorafenib. There was no evidence of any improvement in OS attributable to sorafenib for patients positive for HBV and negative for HCV.

Download Full-text

End Points for Colon Cancer Adjuvant Trials: Observations and Recommendations Based on Individual Patient Data From 20,898 Patients Enrolled Onto 18 Randomized Trials From the ACCENT Group

Journal of Clinical Oncology ◽

10.1200/jco.2006.10.4323 ◽

2007 ◽

Vol 25 (29) ◽

pp. 4569-4574 ◽

Cited By ~ 165

Author(s):

Daniel J. Sargent ◽

Smitha Patiyil ◽

Greg Yothers ◽

Daniel G. Haller ◽

Richard Gray ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Individual Patient Data ◽

Strong Predictor ◽

Disease Free Survival ◽

Patient Data ◽

Phase Iii ◽

Stage Iii ◽

End Points ◽

End Point ◽

Phase Iii Trials

Purpose The traditional end point for colon adjuvant clinical trials is overall survival (OS). We previously validated disease-free survival (DFS) after 3-year follow-up as an excellent predictor of 5-year OS results. Here we explore shorter term DFS and OS end points, as well as stage dependency. Methods Individual patient data from 18 phase III trials including 43 arms and 20,898 patients were pooled. Association measures included correlation of event rates within arms, correlation of hazard ratios (HRs) between arms, trial level significance comparisons (via log-rank testing), and a formal surrogacy model. Results DFS at earlier times was less accurate in predicting OS than 3-year DFS, but 2-year DFS remained a strong predictor. DFS with 1-year minimum follow-up demonstrated perfect negative predicted value; all trials negative at 1 year for DFS were negative for 5-year OS. OS with 3-year minimum follow-up was also an excellent predictor for 5-year OS; OS at earlier time points provided inaccurate prediction. The association between 3-year DFS and 5-year OS was greater for stage III patients; correlation of HR within trials was 0.92 (95% CI, 0.85 to 0.95) for stage III patients and 0.70 (95% CI, 0.44 to 0.80) for stage II patients. Conclusion DFS outcomes after 2- or 3-year median follow-up are excellent predictors of 5-year OS. DFS outcomes are appropriate for trials in which the majority of patients are stage III. DFS after 2- or 3-year median follow-up should be considered as the primary end point in future colon adjuvant trials.

Download Full-text