Meta-analysis to Investigate the Correlation Between Event-Free Survival and Overall Survival in Patients with Resectable Locally Advanced Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
While overall survival (OS) is a widely accepted trial endpoint in oncology, survival data are often immature in early-stage populations. Alternative time-to-event outcomes have been considered by regulatory and reimbursement agencies to allow for early patient access. Event-free survival (EFS) has shown strong correlations with OS in patients with locally advanced (LA) head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) and within the subgroup with unresectable tumors. With novel neoadjuvant and adjuvant immunotherapies being investigated in resectable LA-HNSCC, this study aimed to assess the trial-level correlation of EFS and OS in patients with resectable LA-HNSCC. A systematic review (October 29, 2024) identified randomized controlled trials evaluating surgery with adjuvant therapy, neoadjuvant therapy, or both in patients with resectable LA-HNSCC. Trials reporting hazard ratios (HRs) or Kaplan-Meier curves for OS (time from randomization to death) and EFS (time from randomization to disease progression/recurrence or death) were eligible for the analysis. Base case included trials comparing neoadjuvant therapy + surgery + adjuvant therapy versus surgery + adjuvant therapy. Sensitivity analyses included models with trials comparing broader regimens (e.g., adjuvant therapy versus adjuvant therapy), excluding an outlier trial and restricting to publications after 2004. Correlations were measured between log(EFS HR) and log(OS HR) using regression models, with their strength measured using Pearson’s correlation coefficient (R). The review included 45 trials, with 20 trials qualifying for correlation analysis. R (95% confidence interval) was 0.91 (0.36, 0.99) in the base case (n = 5 trials) and 0.41 (−0.01, 0.71; n = 20), 0.78 (0.52, 0.91; n = 19), and 0.76 (0.41, 0.92; n = 13) in the three sensitivity analyses, respectively. Strong trial-level correlations were observed between EFS and OS, suggesting EFS is a valid surrogate for OS in patients with resectable LA-HNSCC, particularly in trials investigating neoadjuvant therapy + surgery + adjuvant therapy. When studying new cancer treatments, researchers often measure treatment success using overall survival. This assesses how long patients live after treatment. However, in early-stage cancers, it can take years to see differences in survival between treatment groups. This makes it difficult to quickly assess whether a new treatment is effective. Another measure, event-free survival, documents the time before a patient’s cancer progresses or recurs, or the patient dies. Because these events usually happen sooner than death, event-free survival may help researchers and doctors evaluate treatments more quickly. In this study, we focused on head and neck squamous cell carcinoma that is locally advanced but still can be removed with surgery. We reviewed published clinical trials that tested treatments given before or after surgery, such as radiation or drug therapies. We examined how closely event-free survival matched overall survival across different trials. A strong match would mean event-free survival could be used as an early signal of treatment benefit. We found that in trials where patients received treatment before surgery (sometimes followed by additional treatment after surgery), there was a strong link between event-free survival and overall survival. This suggests that event-free survival is a good early indicator of how well patients do in the long term. Our findings support the use of event-free survival as a meaningful outcome in future clinical trials for this type of cancer.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».