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

Cocktail & Poster Display session

107P - Censoring imbalance in ACIS trial for prostate cancer


06 Mar 2023


Cocktail & Poster Display session


Noa Zimhony-Nissim


Annals of Oncology (2023) 8 (1suppl_2): 100898-100898. 10.1016/esmoop/esmoop100898


N. Zimhony-Nissim1, S. Gilboa2, D. Bomze3, T. Meirson4, G. Markel1

Author affiliations

  • 1 Davidoff Cancer Center, Rabin Medical Center, 49100 - Petah-Tikva/IL
  • 2 Faculty Of Medicine, Tel Aviv University-Sackler Faculty of Medicine, 6997801 - Tel Aviv/IL
  • 3 Institute Of Immunobiology, Kantonsspital St. Gallen, 9007 - St. Gallen/CH
  • 4 Davidoff Cancer Center, Rabin Medical Center, 49100 - Petah Tikva/IL


This content is available to ESMO members and event participants.

Abstract 107P


In the ACIS trial, apalutamide plus abiraterone-prednisone has demonstrated longer radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) compared with abiraterone-prednisone in chemotherapy-naïve patients with metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer. Despite reporting prolonged rPFS, no improvement in overall survival or quality of life was found and significant difference in rPFS was lost when assessed by blinded independent central review (BICR). Here we examined whether informative censoring might explain the discrepancy between the outcomes.


Patient-level survival data were extracted and reconstructed using the semi-automated open-source tool WebPlotDigitizer and R statistical software. We utilized the reverse-Kapan-Meier method, in which the status indicator “event” and “censored” are flipped.


We found that the rPFS of ACIS was associated with a significant censoring imbalance (reverse hazard ratio [HR] 1.32 [95% CI 1.08–1.61]; p=0.007), with 14% excess censoring in the intervention group. After performing sensitivity analysis, in which the balance in censoring between groups was partially restored, the difference in rPFS was lost (HR 0.86 [95% CI 0.73–1.00]; p=0·095), consistent with the non-significant results of the BICR assessment. To show this is unique to the trial we analyzed similar studies in mCRPC demonstrating anti-tumor activity and found that they were not associated with censoring imbalance.


When a study lacking survival benefit relies on surrogate endpoint to claim the presence of a clinical benefit, it is essential to exclude informative censoring. The measured effect in ACIS could be a product of the inherent limitations of survival analysis when excessive censoring exists.

Clinical trial identification

Editorial acknowledgement

Legal entity responsible for the study

The authors.


Has not received any funding.


All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

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.