CRITICAL READING OF THE LITERATURE RELEVANT POINTS: - End points (including the one used for sample size) - Surrogate end points - Quality of the performed.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Appraisal of an RCT using a critical appraisal checklist
Advertisements

Neoadjuvant therapy for Rectal cancer
DEBATE: What is the Optimal Sequence of Therapies for Stage II-III Adenocarcinoma of the Proximal Stomach? Michael A. Choti, MD Department of Surgery UT.
Synopsis of FDA Colorectal Cancer Endpoints Workshop Michael J. O’Connell, MD Director, Allegheny Cancer Center Associate Chairman, NSABP Pittsburgh, PA.
Doug Altman Centre for Statistics in Medicine, Oxford, UK
1 Health and Disease in Populations 2002 Week 9 – 2/5/02 Randomised controlled trials 2 Dr Jenny Kurinczuk.
The Bahrain Branch of the UK Cochrane Centre In Collaboration with Reyada Training & Management Consultancy, Dubai-UAE Cochrane Collaboration and Systematic.
Transparency and accuracy in reporting health research Doug Altman The EQUATOR Network Centre for Statistics in Medicine, Oxford, UK.
ABCWINRisk and Statistics1 Risk and Statistics Risk Assessment in Clinical Decision Making Ulrich Mansmann Medical Statistics Branch University of Heidelberg.
Critical Appraisal of an Article by Dr. I. Selvaraj B. SC. ,M. B. B. S
Sample Size Determination Ziad Taib March 7, 2014.
Dr. LP Si Tseung Kwan O Hospital. Introduction CA stomach is the 4 th most commonly diagnosed malignancy worldwide 2 nd most common cause of cancer-related.
As noted by Gary H. Lyman (JCO, 2012) “CER is an important framework for systematically identifying and summarizing the totality of evidence on the effectiveness,
Quantitative Methods – Week 7: Inductive Statistics II: Hypothesis Testing Roman Studer Nuffield College
Critical Appraisal of Clinical Practice Guidelines
Long-Term Effects of Continuing Adjuvant Tamoxifen to 10 Years versus Stopping at 5 Years After Diagnosis of Oestrogen Receptor- Positive Breast Cancer:
Clinical Trials. What is a clinical trial? Clinical trials are research studies involving people Used to find better ways to prevent, detect, and treat.
Utility of Post-Therapy Surveillance Scans in Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma Thompson C et al. Proc ASCO 2013;Abstract 8504.
Air Quality Health Risk Assessment – Methodological Issues and Needs Presented to SAMSI September 19, 2007 Research Triangle Park, NC Anne E. Smith, Ph.D.
Surrogate Endpoints and Correlative Outcomes Hem/Onc Journal Club January 9, 2009.
Phase III studies of Xeloda® in colorectal cancer (CRC)
Discussion abstracts Alberto Sobrero MD Ospedale San Martino Genoa, Italy.
Effective Presentation of Study Results How are RCTs presented in abstracts & publications? and Some things to consider in your own presentations NCIC.
Repair of obstetric anal sphincter tears Journal Club 18 th February 2011 By Dr. Ian Haines GP-ST1 & Nevine te West.
1 Recent trends in colorectal cancer in Norway: incidence, management and outcomes Arne Wibe, MD, PhD Professor of Surgery St. Olavs Hospital Trondheim,
Recent Advances in Head and Neck Cancer Robert I. Haddad, M.D., and Dong M. Shin, M.D. The NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL of MEDICINE N Engl J Med 2008;359:
A systematic meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials for adjuvant chemotherapy for localized resectable soft-tissue sarcoma Nabeel Pervaiz Nigel.
Understanding real research 4. Randomised controlled trials.
Delivering clinical research to make patients, and the NHS, better OG neoadjuvant therapy Brachytherapy Stephen Falk dd/mm/yyyy.
Clinical Writing for Interventional Cardiologists.
Protocols for Advanced Prostate Cancer and/or Local Failure After Radical Prostatectomy Isaac Powell, MD.
CE-1 IRESSA ® Clinical Efficacy Ronald B. Natale, MD Director Cedars Sinai Comprehensive Cancer Center Ronald B. Natale, MD Director Cedars Sinai Comprehensive.
CJ Allegra, G Yothers, MJ O’Connell, MS Roh, RW Beart, NJ Petrelli, S Lopa, S Sharif, and N Wolmark Neoadjuvant Therapy For Rectal Cancer: Mature Results.
The Discussion Section. 2 Overall Purpose : To interpret your results and justify your interpretation The Discussion.
Prof. Francesco Boccardo University and National Cancer Research Institute of Genoa, Italy Prof. Francesco Boccardo University and National Cancer Research.
Accelerated hemithoracic radiation followed by extrapleural pneumonectomy for malignant pleural mesothelioma Marc de Perrot, Ronald Feld, Natasha B Leighl,
Study designs. Kate O’Donnell General Practice & Primary Care.
Objectives  Identify the key elements of a good randomised controlled study  To clarify the process of meta analysis and developing a systematic review.
Evaluating the Medical Evidence ​ A TOOLKIT FOR THE INTERPRETING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF INTERVENTIONS Niteesh Choudhy, M.D., Ph.D.
Adjuvant chemotherapy in Rectal Cancer?. What is the evidence for adjuvant chemotherapy? Do patients achieving a pathological complete response need chemotherapy?
Management of the primary in Stage IV colorectal cancer Erin Kennedy, MD, PhD, FRCSC Colorectal Surgery Mount Sinai Hospital University of Toronto.
EBM --- Journal Reading Presenter :呂宥達 Date : 2005/10/27.
Quality of Life (QOL) & Patient Reported Outcomes (PRO) Lori Minasian, MD Chief, Community Oncology and Prevention Trials Research Group, DCP, NCI, NIH,
Mamoun A. Rahman Surgical SHO Mr Osborne’s team. Introduction Blood transfusion: -Preoperative ( elective) -Intra/postoperative ( urgent) Blood transfusion.
European Patients’ Academy on Therapeutic Innovation Ethical and practical challenges of organising clinical trials in small populations.
Patterns of Care in Medical Oncology Treatment of Metastatic Colon Cancer.
Making Randomized Clinical Trials Seem Less Random Andrew P.J. Olson, MD Assistant Professor Departments of Medicine and Pediatrics University of Minnesota.
Results Abstract Analysis of Prognostic Web-based Models for Stage II and III Colon Cancer: A Population-based Validation of Numeracy and Adjuvant! Online.
1 Chapter 6 SAMPLE SIZE ISSUES Ref: Lachin, Controlled Clinical Trials 2:93-113, 1981.
Endpoints in adjuvant trials: a systematic review of the literature in colon cancer and proposed definitions for future trials Marc E. Buyse.
Response, PFS or OS – what is the best endpoint in advanced colorectal cancer? Marc Buyse IDDI, Louvain-la-Neuve & Hasselt University
Neoadjuvant FOLFOX with Bevacizumab but without Pelvic Radiation for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer Schrag D et al. Proc ASCO 2010;Abstract 3511.
Evidence-Based Mental Health PSYC 377. Structure of the Presentation 1. Describe EBP issues 2. Categorize EBP issues 3. Assess the quality of ‘evidence’
The impact of age on outcome in early-stage breast cancer 방사선종양학과 R2. 최진현.
Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in the treatment of NSCLC Department of Thoracic Oncology, University Hospital Ghent, Belgium Current Opinion in Oncology 2007,
Brady Et Al., "sequential compression device compliance in postoperative obstetrics and gynecology patients", obstetrics and gynecology, vol. 125, no.
Evidence-based Medicine
Benefits and Pitfalls of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses
นายแพทย์ธราธร ตุงคะสมิต นายแพทย์ชำนาญการพิเศษ โรงพยาบาลมะเร็งอุดรธานี
Treatment With Continuous, Hyperfractionated, Accelerated Radiotherapy (CHART) For Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC): The Weston Park Hospital Experience.
Interventional trials
Introduction. TREATMENT BASED ON TUMOR SIDEDNESS IN mCRC: THE EVIDENCE AND PRACTICAL APPLICATION.
Critical Reading of Clinical Study Results
Dr Jessica Jenkins Consultant Oncologist
Adjuvant Radiation is Required for Gastric Cancer
The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials  David Moher, MSc, Kenneth F Schulz,
Alan P. Venook, MD University of California, SF
The role of simultaneous resection of synchronous liver metastasis and primary colorectal cancer Samuel Lo Department of Surgery.
Evidence Based Practice
Presentation transcript:

CRITICAL READING OF THE LITERATURE RELEVANT POINTS: - End points (including the one used for sample size) - Surrogate end points - Quality of the performed procedures - Differences in the procedure/therapies after randomization - Follow up

SURROGATE END POINTS A laboratory measurement or clinical symptom used as a substitute for a clinically meaningful end point that measures survival directly or other relevant end points Key point: Relationship between the surrogate measure and the clinically relevant end point should be consistent and strong, based on RCT data

SURROGATE END POINTS  Good correlation between disease free survival and overall survival for patients with colon cancer receiving 5-FU after surgical resection (Sargent et al, JCO 2005; 23:8664)  Disease free survival: surrogate for overall survival

CRITICAL READING OF THE LITERATURE RELEVANT POINTS: - End points (including the one used for sample size) - Surrogate end points - Quality of the performed procedures - Differences in the procedure/therapies after randomization - Follow up

Quality of the procedures performed  Quality could change during the trial Gerard JP, JCO 2006; 24:4620.  Should TME have been performed in the standardized way described in the protocol, would the outcomes have been different? Equally distributed in both groups?

CRITICAL READING OF THE LITERATURE RELEVANT POINTS: - End points (including the one used for sample size) - Surrogate end points - Quality of the performed procedures - Differences in the procedure/therapies after randomization - Follow up

Differences in the procedures after randomization Any difference observed in the outcome can be explained by the treatment (if things have been carried out equally for both groups except the treatment under study after randomization) Should postoperative chemotherapy be equally distributed in both groups, would it have modified the outcome? Why Post Op CHT left to the clinician? Buijko, BJS 2006; 93:1215.

RECTAL CANCER SPHINCTER SAVING POST OP CHEMOTHERAPHY Main question Potentially confounding factors CONFOUNDING

CRITICAL READING OF THE LITERATURE RELEVANT POINTS: - End points (including the one used for sample size) - Surrogate end points - Quality of the performed procedures - Differences in the procedure/therapies after randomization - Follow up

Assessment intervals every 8 weeks from start of treatment Source: Panageas KS, Ben-orat L, Dickler MN,et al. When you look matters: The effect of assessment schedule on progression-free survival. JNCI 2007; 99(6): Treatment Start Last Scan with no progression Progression detected Assessed 8 weeks Actual progression time 0 weeks8 weeks16 weeks24 weeks

Role of values in assessing the evidence Critical reading of the literature is not an error finding exercise The question is to understand why a particular decision about design was made and to assess the impact on the outcome Example: QUASAR collaborative group. Adjuvant chemotherapy versus observation in colorectal cancer: a randomised trial. Lancet 2007; 370:

Quasar design and main results QUASAR (Quick And Simple And Reliable) was designed to provide large scale randomised evidence on the value of adjuvant chemotherapy (5- FU+Folinic) in CRC patients and, in particular, stage II. - Pragmatic trial design: local clinical teams categorising patients as having clear or uncertain indication for ADJ CHT. No per protocol definition of the indication of CHT, clinician decision. - Patients with uncertain indication were randomised: CH vs Obs - Yearly follow-up form that requested serious toxicity, recurrence and death. In the UK, also national mortality records. - Between 1994 and 2003, 3239 patients entered by 332 clinicians, in 150 centres in 19 countries. - 91% stage II, 71% colon and 29% rectal cancer. Rdt equally distributed in both groups. - Pathological data only available in 20% of the cases.

MortalityAdj cht 19.2% Obs 22.9% RR: 0.82 ( ) RecurrenceAdj cht 18.1% Obs 22.2% RR: 0.78 ( ) Quality of life: only significant differences during CHT Number needed to treat: - 1/0.037: 1 out 27 Mortality - 1/0.041: 1 out 24 Recurrence Quasar design and main results

Magnitude of the clinical benefit: Is 3.7% decrease in the risk of death enough? And 4.1% for recurrence? Are any other evidence supporting this benefit of borderline statistical significance? Yes. Methodological questions:  Patients included: Too heterogeneous? Could we know risk distribution based on pathology data? Rectal cancer?  What about compliance with CHT? 77% of patients received at least 80% of the full dose and 58% full dose.  Did the follow-up of the patients differ between countries? Could it influence the outcome? Questions for interpretation of the evidence added by quasar trial

Was the trial design too pragmatic? Alternatively, did the authors achieve the aim to replicate the relevant question in the clinical practice? Should we modify our clinical practice/clinical guideline due to the results of this trial? Let’s assume that this trial has proved the efficacy of adjuvant chemotherapy in stage II CRC: Which is the chemotherapy we should recommend? Health policy relevant questions: Questions for interpretation of the evidence added by quasar trial

Role of personal values and experience in the interpretation of the evidence added by a trial The decision about what kind of evidence is the most important in a particular clinical situation is a matter of clinical judgment : Evidence is not a substitute for clinical judgment All these aspects are present in a physician assessment of evidence: Better to make them explicit In a clinical relationship, values of the physician and the patient, previous experiences of the physician in similar cases as well as the meaning of the disease for the patient, how important are side effects, family support …. are important in assessing evidence and applying it to a particular patient

CONSORT statement The Revised CONSORT Statement for Reporting Randomized Trials Douglas G. Altman, DSc; Kenneth F. Schulz, PhD; David Moher, MSc; Matthias Egger, MD; Frank Davidoff, MD; Diana Elbourne, PhD; Peter C. Gøtzsche, MD; and Thomas Lang, MA, for the CONSORT Group Ann Intern Med. 2001;134: