Journal of clinical epidemiology The Importance of Reporting CT Scan Intervals in Real-World Oncology Studies: A Simulation Analysis of Afatinib in Advanced-Stage Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

IF 7.3 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Sasiwimon Iwsakul, Sarayut Lucien Geater
{"title":"Journal of clinical epidemiology The Importance of Reporting CT Scan Intervals in Real-World Oncology Studies: A Simulation Analysis of Afatinib in Advanced-Stage Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.","authors":"Sasiwimon Iwsakul, Sarayut Lucien Geater","doi":"10.1016/j.jclinepi.2025.111841","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>In real-world oncology studies, progression-free survival (PFS) is often used as a surrogate endpoint. However, the interval of the CT scans, which might impact PFS, is usually not mentioned in publications based on real-world data. This study aims to determine the relationship between CT scan interval and PFS captured across different assessment frequencies (captured PFS or cPFS). The secondary objective is to identify appropriate correction factors for median PFS (mPFS) in real-world data, necessary for comparisons with clinical trials.</p><p><strong>Study design and setting: </strong>A simulation was conducted to create theoretical PFS data. Time-to-event analyses, including Kaplan-Meier survival curves, Cox regression models, parametric survival models, and multilevel survival regression models, were used to assess the effect of various CT scan intervals on cPFS durations. The Laplace regression model was employed to compute fiftieth-percentile ratios.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mPFS (95% CI) captured by cPFS6, cPFS12, cPFS16, and cPFS20 were 11.56 (10.78, 12.71), 12.42 (11.17, 13.80), 12.98 (11.70, 13.96), and 13.80 (12.71, 14.49) months, respectively. There was a significant difference in mPFS durations captured at different CT scan intervals. The correction factors for converting mPFS from cPFS12, cPFS16, and cPFS20 to cPFS6 were 1.06, 1.09, and 1.14, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Longer CT intervals resulted in longer mPFS, leading to a systematic overestimation of about 1-2 months.</p>","PeriodicalId":51079,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Epidemiology","volume":" ","pages":"111841"},"PeriodicalIF":7.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Epidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2025.111841","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: In real-world oncology studies, progression-free survival (PFS) is often used as a surrogate endpoint. However, the interval of the CT scans, which might impact PFS, is usually not mentioned in publications based on real-world data. This study aims to determine the relationship between CT scan interval and PFS captured across different assessment frequencies (captured PFS or cPFS). The secondary objective is to identify appropriate correction factors for median PFS (mPFS) in real-world data, necessary for comparisons with clinical trials.

Study design and setting: A simulation was conducted to create theoretical PFS data. Time-to-event analyses, including Kaplan-Meier survival curves, Cox regression models, parametric survival models, and multilevel survival regression models, were used to assess the effect of various CT scan intervals on cPFS durations. The Laplace regression model was employed to compute fiftieth-percentile ratios.

Results: The mPFS (95% CI) captured by cPFS6, cPFS12, cPFS16, and cPFS20 were 11.56 (10.78, 12.71), 12.42 (11.17, 13.80), 12.98 (11.70, 13.96), and 13.80 (12.71, 14.49) months, respectively. There was a significant difference in mPFS durations captured at different CT scan intervals. The correction factors for converting mPFS from cPFS12, cPFS16, and cPFS20 to cPFS6 were 1.06, 1.09, and 1.14, respectively.

Conclusions: Longer CT intervals resulted in longer mPFS, leading to a systematic overestimation of about 1-2 months.

报告CT扫描间隔在真实世界肿瘤学研究中的重要性:阿法替尼在晚期非小细胞肺癌中的模拟分析。
目的:在现实世界的肿瘤学研究中,无进展生存期(PFS)经常被用作替代终点。然而,CT扫描的间隔,这可能会影响PFS,通常没有在基于实际数据的出版物中提到。本研究旨在确定CT扫描间隔与不同评估频率下捕获的PFS(捕获的PFS或cPFS)之间的关系。次要目标是确定现实世界数据中中位PFS (mPFS)的适当校正因子,这是与临床试验比较所必需的。研究设计和设置:通过模拟产生理论PFS数据。时间-事件分析,包括Kaplan-Meier生存曲线、Cox回归模型、参数生存模型和多水平生存回归模型,用于评估不同CT扫描间隔对cPFS持续时间的影响。采用拉普拉斯回归模型计算第50百分位比率。结果:cPFS6、cPFS12、cPFS16和cPFS20捕获的mPFS (95% CI)分别为11.56(10.78,12.71)、12.42(11.17,13.80)、12.98(11.70,13.96)和13.80(12.71,14.49)个月。不同CT扫描间隔所捕获的mPFS持续时间有显著差异。cPFS12、cPFS16和cPFS20转化为cPFS6的校正因子分别为1.06、1.09和1.14。结论:较长的CT间隔导致较长的mPFS,导致系统高估约1-2个月。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
12.00
自引率
6.90%
发文量
320
审稿时长
44 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Clinical Epidemiology strives to enhance the quality of clinical and patient-oriented healthcare research by advancing and applying innovative methods in conducting, presenting, synthesizing, disseminating, and translating research results into optimal clinical practice. Special emphasis is placed on training new generations of scientists and clinical practice leaders.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信