Dutch Medicines Evaluation Board, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Dutch Medicines Evaluation Board, Utrecht, The Netherlands; Department for Health Evidence, Biostatistics Section, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
ESMO Open. 2023 Apr;8(2):101209. doi: 10.1016/j.esmoop.2023.101209. Epub 2023 Apr 11.
Single-arm trials (SATs) can sometimes be used to support marketing authorization of anticancer medicinal products in the European Union. The level and durability of antitumor activity of the product as well as context are important aspects to determine the relevance of trial results. The aim of this study is to provide details on the contextualization of trial results and to evaluate the magnitude of benefit of medicinal products approved based on SATs.
We focused on anticancer medicinal products for solid tumors approved on the basis of SAT results (2012-2021). Data were retrieved from European public assessment reports and/or published literature. The benefit of these medicinal products was evaluated via the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO)-Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (MCBS).
Eighteen medicinal products were approved based on 21 SATs-few medicinal products were supported by >1 SAT. For the majority of clinical trials, a clinically relevant treatment effect was (pre)specified (71.4%) and most often an accompanying sample size calculation was provided. For 10 studies, each testing a different medicinal product, a justification for the threshold for a clinically relevant treatment effect could be identified. At least 12 out of 18 applications included information to facilitate the contextualization of trial results, including six supportive studies. Of the pivotal SATs analyzed (n = 21), three were assigned an ESMO-MCBS score of 4, which corresponds to 'substantial' benefit.
The clinical relevance of the treatment effects shown by medicinal products for solid tumors tested in SATs is dependent on the effect size and context. To better facilitate regulatory decision making, prespecifying and motivating a clinically relevant effect and aligning the sample size to that effect is important. External controls may facilitate in the contextualization process, but the associated limitations must be addressed.
单臂试验(SAT)有时可用于支持欧盟中抗癌药物的营销授权。产品的抗肿瘤活性水平和持久性以及背景是确定试验结果相关性的重要方面。本研究旨在提供有关试验结果背景化的详细信息,并评估基于 SAT 批准的药物的获益程度。
我们专注于基于 SAT 结果批准的用于实体瘤的抗癌药物(2012-2021 年)。数据从欧洲公共评估报告和/或已发表的文献中检索。通过欧洲肿瘤内科学会(ESMO)临床获益量表(MCBS)评估这些药物的获益。
18 种药物基于 21 项 SAT 批准-少数药物得到>1 项 SAT 的支持。对于大多数临床试验,(预先)指定了具有临床相关性的治疗效果(71.4%),并且大多数情况下都提供了相应的样本量计算。对于 10 项研究,每项研究测试一种不同的药物,可以确定具有临床相关性的治疗效果阈值的理由。至少有 18 项申请中的 12 项包含有助于背景化试验结果的信息,包括 6 项支持性研究。在分析的关键 SAT 中(n=21),有 3 项被分配了 ESMO-MCBS 评分为 4,这对应于“显著”获益。
在 SAT 中测试的用于实体瘤的药物所显示的治疗效果的临床相关性取决于效应大小和背景。为了更好地促进监管决策,预设和激励具有临床相关性的效果,并使样本量与该效果保持一致非常重要。外部对照可能有助于背景化过程,但必须解决相关的局限性。