Twelve ESMO Congress 2022 breakthroughs: practicing oncologists' perceptions and potential application on presented data.
ESMO Congress 2022
implementation
methodology
review
Journal
ESMO open
ISSN: 2059-7029
Titre abrégé: ESMO Open
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101690685
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
02 2023
02 2023
Historique:
received:
04
11
2022
revised:
05
12
2022
accepted:
09
12
2022
pubmed:
13
1
2023
medline:
8
3
2023
entrez:
12
1
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
During the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Congress 2022, outcome data of a great number of clinical trials were presented. For the attending medical oncologist, it is important to structure these data in a way that facilitates a trade-off between treatment burden and benefit. To illustrate this, we carried out a narrative non-systematic review of 12 selected oral presentations with potential impact on future daily practice, focusing on trial methodology, possible study flaws, reported clinical benefit and implementability. The selected presentations encompassed 10 phase III trials, 1 randomized phase II trial and 1 phase II trial. In 7 out of 12 trials, quality of life and/or patient-reported outcomes had been evaluated. None of the trials, which reported progression-free survival (PFS) data, provided information, which could exclude informative censoring bias. In none of the trials reporting overall survival (OS) data, potential flaws due to undesirable crossover and imbalance between study groups regarding post-progression treatments were addressed. For the 11 reviewed randomized trials, the ESMO-Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (MCBS) grade achieved with the new intervention was calculated based on the presented data. The MCBS grade varied from 1 to 5. Our review confirms the high-quality standard of current cancer research and the clinical relevance of the research questions answered. However, during presentation of PFS and/or OS data, factors known to affect PFS and OS analysis should be structurally addressed. In order to keep cancer care affordable and sustainable, it could be considered to include an ESMO-MCBS threshold in the drug appraisal process of regulatory authorities.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
During the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Congress 2022, outcome data of a great number of clinical trials were presented. For the attending medical oncologist, it is important to structure these data in a way that facilitates a trade-off between treatment burden and benefit.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
To illustrate this, we carried out a narrative non-systematic review of 12 selected oral presentations with potential impact on future daily practice, focusing on trial methodology, possible study flaws, reported clinical benefit and implementability.
RESULTS
The selected presentations encompassed 10 phase III trials, 1 randomized phase II trial and 1 phase II trial. In 7 out of 12 trials, quality of life and/or patient-reported outcomes had been evaluated. None of the trials, which reported progression-free survival (PFS) data, provided information, which could exclude informative censoring bias. In none of the trials reporting overall survival (OS) data, potential flaws due to undesirable crossover and imbalance between study groups regarding post-progression treatments were addressed. For the 11 reviewed randomized trials, the ESMO-Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (MCBS) grade achieved with the new intervention was calculated based on the presented data. The MCBS grade varied from 1 to 5.
CONCLUSIONS
Our review confirms the high-quality standard of current cancer research and the clinical relevance of the research questions answered. However, during presentation of PFS and/or OS data, factors known to affect PFS and OS analysis should be structurally addressed. In order to keep cancer care affordable and sustainable, it could be considered to include an ESMO-MCBS threshold in the drug appraisal process of regulatory authorities.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36634532
pii: S2059-7029(22)00407-0
doi: 10.1016/j.esmoop.2022.100773
pmc: PMC9843205
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Congress
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
100773Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Disclosure JB reports honorarium for advisory boards and educational symposium: AMGEN, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo, Roche Ltd, MSD, Servier. BB invited speaker, expert honoraria: Lilly, AstraZeneca; non-financial interest: member of scientific committee of NSGO-CTU, gynecological cancer group of EORTC. AJCT reports honorarium for speaker engagement and writing engagement: BMS, Fundacion ECO, Pierre-Fabre, Sanofi; meeting expenses: MSD, Novartis, Sanofi. AI declares honoraria for lectures and travel accommodations: BMS, MSD, Novartis, Pierre Fabre Pharma, AstraZeneca, Sanofi. BP received honoraria from Novartis, Lilly and BMS. LP reports honorarium for advisory boards, speaker engagement and writing engagement: Amgen, Astellas, BMS, Janssen, Merck, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi Genzyme, Takeda; local PI: G1 Therapeutics, Infinity Pharmaceuticals, Karyopharm, MEI Pharma, MSD, Pfizer, Roche, Seattle Genetics; trial chair: Roche; consultant: ClinQuestAdria. RV reports honorarium for advisory boards and speaker engagement: Accord, BMS, Egis, Eli Lilly, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, Servier Pharma; local PI: Amgen; coordinating PI: BMS, Merck. MS reports speaker’s fee: Ipsen, Janssen; advisory role: Janssen, Merck, Roche; travel grants: Ipsen. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.