IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v38y2018i7p789-796.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Exploring the Effects of Early Censoring and Analysis of Clinical Trial Survival Data on Effectiveness and Cost-effectiveness Estimation through a Case Study in Advanced Breast Cancer

Author

Listed:
  • Adrian Bagust
  • Sophie J. Beale

Abstract

Interim analyses of clinical trial data are frequently used to provide evidence to obtain marketing authorization for new drugs. However, results from such analyses may not reflect true estimates of relative effectiveness when trial follow-up is complete. Survival results, available at 2 time points from a breast cancer clinical trial, were compared to test the hypothesis that using immature data and a widely used right-censoring rule leads to biased survival estimates. Kaplan-Meier progression-free and overall survival data from 2 published CLEOPATRA trial reports (2012 and 2014) were digitized. Overlaying these results highlighted divergent trends. Parametric functions were fitted to both data sets but did not indicate consistent patterns that could be used as a basis for long-term extrapolation. Heavy censoring of patients in the early data cut coincides with sudden changes in hazard trends and survival patterns, supporting the hypothesis of censoring bias. This challenges the validity of estimates of clinical benefit (progression-free survival and overall survival) based on extrapolation of results from interim analyses of trial data, using a commonly employed censoring rule.

Suggested Citation

  • Adrian Bagust & Sophie J. Beale, 2018. "Exploring the Effects of Early Censoring and Analysis of Clinical Trial Survival Data on Effectiveness and Cost-effectiveness Estimation through a Case Study in Advanced Breast Cancer," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 38(7), pages 789-796, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:38:y:2018:i:7:p:789-796
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X18790966
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X18790966
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X18790966?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:38:y:2018:i:7:p:789-796. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.