Durable response rate as an endpoint in cancer immunotherapy: insights from oncolytic virus clinical trials
Abstract Background Traditional response criteria may be insufficient to characterize full clinical benefits of anticancer immunotherapies. Consequently, endpoints such as durable response rate (DRR; a continuous response [complete or partial objective response] beginning within 12 months of treatme...
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2017-09-01
|
Series: | Journal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40425-017-0276-8 |
id |
doaj-f658eb457d8f4a8389737f99c16ddf40 |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-f658eb457d8f4a8389737f99c16ddf402020-11-25T00:46:34ZengBMJ Publishing GroupJournal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer2051-14262017-09-01511910.1186/s40425-017-0276-8Durable response rate as an endpoint in cancer immunotherapy: insights from oncolytic virus clinical trialsHoward L. Kaufman0Robert H. I. Andtbacka1Frances A. Collichio2Michael Wolf3Zhongyun Zhao4Mark Shilkrut5Igor Puzanov6Merrick Ross7Rutgers Cancer Institute of New JerseyHuntsman Cancer Institute, University of UtahThe University of North Carolina Chapel HillAmgen Inc.Amgen Inc.Amgen Inc.Department of Medicine, Roswell Park Cancer InstituteMD Anderson Cancer CenterAbstract Background Traditional response criteria may be insufficient to characterize full clinical benefits of anticancer immunotherapies. Consequently, endpoints such as durable response rate (DRR; a continuous response [complete or partial objective response] beginning within 12 months of treatment and lasting ≥6 months) have been employed. There has not, however, been validation that DRR correlates with other more traditional endpoints of clinical benefit such as overall survival. Methods We evaluated whether DRR was associated with clinically meaningful measures of benefit (eg, overall survival [OS], quality of life [QoL], or treatment-free interval [TFI]) in a phase 3 clinical trial of an oncolytic virus for melanoma treatment. To evaluate the association between DRR and OS and to mitigate lead time bias, landmark analyses were used. QoL was evaluated using the FACT-BRM questionnaire (comprising the FACT-BRM Physical, Social/Family, Emotional, and Functional well-being domains, the Additional Concerns, Physical and Mental treatment-specific subscales, and the Trial Outcome Index [TOI]). TFI was defined as time from the last study therapy dose to first subsequent therapy dose (including any systemic anticancer therapy for melanoma after study therapy discontinuation). Results Four hundred thirty-six patients were included in the intent-to-treat population. Achieving DR was associated with a statistically significant improvement in OS in a landmark analysis at 9 months (HR = 0.07; P = 0.0003), 12 months (HR = 0.05, P < 0.0001), and 18 months (HR = 0.11; P = 0.0002) that persisted after adjusting for disease stage and line of therapy. Achieving a DR was associated with a longer median TFI (HR = 0.33; P = 0.0007) and a higher TOI improvement rate (58.1% versus 30.0%; P = 0.025). Conclusions Achieving a DR was associated with clinical benefits such as improved OS and QoL and prolonged TFI, thus supporting the usefulness of DR as a meaningful immunotherapy clinical trial endpoint. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT00769704 ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00769704 ) October 7, 2008http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40425-017-0276-8MelanomaTalimogene laherparepvecDurable response ratePatient-reported outcomes |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Howard L. Kaufman Robert H. I. Andtbacka Frances A. Collichio Michael Wolf Zhongyun Zhao Mark Shilkrut Igor Puzanov Merrick Ross |
spellingShingle |
Howard L. Kaufman Robert H. I. Andtbacka Frances A. Collichio Michael Wolf Zhongyun Zhao Mark Shilkrut Igor Puzanov Merrick Ross Durable response rate as an endpoint in cancer immunotherapy: insights from oncolytic virus clinical trials Journal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer Melanoma Talimogene laherparepvec Durable response rate Patient-reported outcomes |
author_facet |
Howard L. Kaufman Robert H. I. Andtbacka Frances A. Collichio Michael Wolf Zhongyun Zhao Mark Shilkrut Igor Puzanov Merrick Ross |
author_sort |
Howard L. Kaufman |
title |
Durable response rate as an endpoint in cancer immunotherapy: insights from oncolytic virus clinical trials |
title_short |
Durable response rate as an endpoint in cancer immunotherapy: insights from oncolytic virus clinical trials |
title_full |
Durable response rate as an endpoint in cancer immunotherapy: insights from oncolytic virus clinical trials |
title_fullStr |
Durable response rate as an endpoint in cancer immunotherapy: insights from oncolytic virus clinical trials |
title_full_unstemmed |
Durable response rate as an endpoint in cancer immunotherapy: insights from oncolytic virus clinical trials |
title_sort |
durable response rate as an endpoint in cancer immunotherapy: insights from oncolytic virus clinical trials |
publisher |
BMJ Publishing Group |
series |
Journal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer |
issn |
2051-1426 |
publishDate |
2017-09-01 |
description |
Abstract Background Traditional response criteria may be insufficient to characterize full clinical benefits of anticancer immunotherapies. Consequently, endpoints such as durable response rate (DRR; a continuous response [complete or partial objective response] beginning within 12 months of treatment and lasting ≥6 months) have been employed. There has not, however, been validation that DRR correlates with other more traditional endpoints of clinical benefit such as overall survival. Methods We evaluated whether DRR was associated with clinically meaningful measures of benefit (eg, overall survival [OS], quality of life [QoL], or treatment-free interval [TFI]) in a phase 3 clinical trial of an oncolytic virus for melanoma treatment. To evaluate the association between DRR and OS and to mitigate lead time bias, landmark analyses were used. QoL was evaluated using the FACT-BRM questionnaire (comprising the FACT-BRM Physical, Social/Family, Emotional, and Functional well-being domains, the Additional Concerns, Physical and Mental treatment-specific subscales, and the Trial Outcome Index [TOI]). TFI was defined as time from the last study therapy dose to first subsequent therapy dose (including any systemic anticancer therapy for melanoma after study therapy discontinuation). Results Four hundred thirty-six patients were included in the intent-to-treat population. Achieving DR was associated with a statistically significant improvement in OS in a landmark analysis at 9 months (HR = 0.07; P = 0.0003), 12 months (HR = 0.05, P < 0.0001), and 18 months (HR = 0.11; P = 0.0002) that persisted after adjusting for disease stage and line of therapy. Achieving a DR was associated with a longer median TFI (HR = 0.33; P = 0.0007) and a higher TOI improvement rate (58.1% versus 30.0%; P = 0.025). Conclusions Achieving a DR was associated with clinical benefits such as improved OS and QoL and prolonged TFI, thus supporting the usefulness of DR as a meaningful immunotherapy clinical trial endpoint. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT00769704 ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00769704 ) October 7, 2008 |
topic |
Melanoma Talimogene laherparepvec Durable response rate Patient-reported outcomes |
url |
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40425-017-0276-8 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT howardlkaufman durableresponserateasanendpointincancerimmunotherapyinsightsfromoncolyticvirusclinicaltrials AT roberthiandtbacka durableresponserateasanendpointincancerimmunotherapyinsightsfromoncolyticvirusclinicaltrials AT francesacollichio durableresponserateasanendpointincancerimmunotherapyinsightsfromoncolyticvirusclinicaltrials AT michaelwolf durableresponserateasanendpointincancerimmunotherapyinsightsfromoncolyticvirusclinicaltrials AT zhongyunzhao durableresponserateasanendpointincancerimmunotherapyinsightsfromoncolyticvirusclinicaltrials AT markshilkrut durableresponserateasanendpointincancerimmunotherapyinsightsfromoncolyticvirusclinicaltrials AT igorpuzanov durableresponserateasanendpointincancerimmunotherapyinsightsfromoncolyticvirusclinicaltrials AT merrickross durableresponserateasanendpointincancerimmunotherapyinsightsfromoncolyticvirusclinicaltrials |
_version_ |
1725264433535516672 |