Oops, you're using an old version of your browser so some of the features on this page may not be displaying properly.

MINIMAL Requirements: Google Chrome 24+Mozilla Firefox 20+Internet Explorer 11Opera 15–18Apple Safari 7SeaMonkey 2.15-2.23

Poster display session

2951 - Correlation between overall survival (OS) and time to progression (TTP) and between OS and response rate (RR) by RECIST in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC)

Date

09 Sep 2017

Session

Poster display session

Topics

Hepatobiliary Cancers

Presenters

Liping Huang

Citation

Annals of Oncology (2017) 28 (suppl_5): v209-v268. 10.1093/annonc/mdx369

Authors

L. Huang1, Y. De Sanctis2, M. Shan2, J. Bruix3, J. Llovet4, A. Cheng5, G. Meinhardt6, K. Nakajima7

Author affiliations

  • 1 Medical Writing And Statistics, Oncology Sbu, Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, 07981 - Whippany/US
  • 2 Medical Writing And Statistics, Oncology Sbu, Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, Whippany/US
  • 3 Bclc Group, Liver Unit, Hospital Clinic, University of Barcelona, 8036 - Barcelona/ES
  • 4 Mount Sinai Liver Cancer Program, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York/US
  • 5 Department Of Oncology, National Taiwan University Hospital, 100 - Taipei/TW
  • 6 Clinical Development Oncology, Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, 07981 - Whippany/US
  • 7 Global Medical Affairs, Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, Whippany/US
More

Resources

Abstract 2951

Background

TTP and RR have been suggested as potential surrogate endpoints for OS in advanced HCC. Here, we report correlation between OS and TTP/RR using simulated trials based on patient-level data from the phase 3 SHARP and AP trials in patients with advanced HCC randomized to sorafenib (SOR) or placebo (PBO).

Methods

A bootstrap approach was applied to simulate 10,000 trials of patients with advanced HCC from SHARP (N = 602; NCT00105443) and AP (N = 226; NCT00492752). RR was measured by investigator assessment per RECIST with SHARP–BCLC amendments (Reig et al. Semin Liver Dis 2014) prior to crossover of PBO subjects to SOR treatment. Pearson correlation was calculated between estimated median OS (mOS) and estimated median TTP (mTTP)/estimated RR for the SOR and PBO arms separately. Pearson correlation of log-rank test statistics comparing SOR and PBO were calculated for OS and TTP; Cochran–Mantel–Haenszel test statistic comparing the 2 arms for RR was also evaluated.

Results

The mean of mOS, mTTP, and RR from simulated trials was similar to that reported in SHARP and AP (Table). The correlation between mOS and mTTP was 0.270 for SOR and 0.218 for PBO in SHARP, and 0.315 for SOR and 0.258 for PBO in AP; the correlation of log-rank test statistics comparing SOR and PBO was 0.387 in SHARP and 0.581 in AP. In SHARP, the correlation between mOS and RR was 0.174 for SOR and 0.051 for PBO; the correlation of test statistics comparing SOR and PBO was 0.156. In AP, the correlation between mOS and RR was 0.138 for SOR and 0.099 for PBO; the correlation of test statistics comparing SOR and PBO was 0.211.Table:

702P

TrialTreatmentmOS, daysSimulated data Mean (SD) of mOS, daysmTTP, daysSimulated data Mean (SD) of mTTP, daysRRSimulated data Mean (SD) of RR
SHARPSorafenib327329 (26.5)119118 (10.1)0.0570.057 (0.013)
Placebo243245 (21.7)8283 (2.4)0.0230.023 (0.009)
APSorafenib198198 (18.8)8485 (6.4)0.0330.033 (0.014)
Placebo127129 (14.5)4242 (2.5)0.0130.013 (0.013)

m, median; SD, standard deviation

Conclusions

The simulated data were representative of patient population data in the SHARP and AP trials for mOS, mTTP, and RR. Our analysis showed a weak correlation between OS and TTP/RR in these trials, suggesting that TTP and RR by RECIST are not reliable surrogate endpoints for OS in patient with advanced HCC.

Clinical trial identification

NCT00105443; NCT00492752.

Legal entity responsible for the study

Bayer

Funding

Bayer

Disclosure

L. Huang, M. Shan, G. Meinhardt, K. Nakajima: Employment and stock ownership: Bayer. Y. De Sanctis: Employment and stock ownership: Bayer. J. Bruix: Research/Education Grant: Daiichi Sankyo, ArQule, Bayer, Sirtex. Honoraria: Gilead, AbbVie, Kowa, Bayer, BTG, ArQule, Terumo, Sirtex, BMS, Eisai, BI, Novartis, OSI, Roche, Onxeo. Advisory Board: Bayer, Kowa, BTG, ArQule, Terumo, Sirtex, BMS, Eisai, Novartis, OSI, Roche, Onxeo. Consulting: Gilead, AbbVie, Kowa, Bayer, BTG, ArQule, Terumo, Sirtex, BMS, BI, Kowa, Novartis, OSI, Roche, Onxeo, Daiichi Sankyo, Abbot, Glaxo, Eli Lilly. J. Llovet: Research/education grant: Bayer, Blueprint, Boehringer Ingelheim, Incyte Advisory board attendance: Bayer, Eisai, BMS, Eli Lilly Consultancy: Bayer, BMS, Blueprint, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Celsion, Boehringer Ingelheim. A-L. Cheng: Honoraria, advisory board attendance, consulting: ONO Pharmaceuticals, BMS, Merck, MSD, Novartis, Bayer.

This site uses cookies. Some of these cookies are essential, while others help us improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used.

For more detailed information on the cookies we use, please check our Privacy Policy.

Customise settings
  • Necessary cookies enable core functionality. The website cannot function properly without these cookies, and you can only disable them by changing your browser preferences.