Braik Dina, Lemieux Christopher, Wilson Brooke E, Salawu Abdulazeez, Abdul Razak Albiruni R
Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
CHU de Québec - Université Laval, Québec, Québec, Canada.
Cancer. 2025 Jan 1;131(1):e35564. doi: 10.1002/cncr.35564. Epub 2024 Sep 18.
The clinical benefit of systemic anticancer therapies can be unclear despite positive trials, and outcomes may not translate to real-world practice. This study evaluated the benefit of soft tissue sarcoma (STS) treatments using the European Society of Medical Oncology Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (MCBS) v1.1 and measured the robustness of STS trial results using Fragility Index (FI).
Database searches for adult phase II or III trials in advanced STS (January 1998-December 2023) were performed. Therapies with trial outcomes that met the criteria for MCBS were scored 1-5 (≥4 represents substantial clinical benefit). For randomized clinical trials with positive time-to-event endpoints, the number of additional events that would render results nonsignificant, FI, was calculated and expressed as a proportion of the experimental arm size (fragility quotient [FQ]). Higher FI/FQ implies more robust results.
Among 194 trials, 19 (9.8%) were phase III. Most phase II trials (146/175; 83.4%) had single-arm or non-comparative design. Trials that were eligible for MCBS scoring (n = 78; 40.2%) evaluated 56 different agents/regimens. Median MCBS score was 2. Only three agents/regimens (all cytotoxic therapies) had an MCBS score ≥4. Among 47 randomized clinical trials, 16 (8 phase II; 8 phase III) trials had positive outcomes. Median FI was 7 (range, 2-52) and 10 trials (62.5%) had an FQ < 10%, with median of 7% (range, 1%-59%).
Most systemic therapies in STS trials did not confer substantial clinical benefit per European Society of Medical Oncology-MCBS. Additionally, positive randomized trials were often fragile. Novel STS therapy trials should use clinically meaningful endpoints and real-world efficacy confirmation is essential, especially for less robust trials.
尽管试验结果呈阳性,但全身抗癌治疗的临床益处可能并不明确,而且其结果可能无法转化为实际临床应用。本研究使用欧洲医学肿瘤学会临床获益程度量表(MCBS)v1.1评估软组织肉瘤(STS)治疗的益处,并使用脆弱性指数(FI)衡量STS试验结果的稳健性。
检索1998年1月至2023年12月期间关于晚期STS的成人II期或III期试验的数据库。对试验结果符合MCBS标准的治疗进行1至5分的评分(≥4分表示有显著临床益处)。对于具有阳性事件发生时间终点的随机临床试验,计算使结果无统计学意义所需的额外事件数量,即FI,并表示为试验组规模的比例(脆弱性商数[FQ])。FI/FQ越高,结果越稳健。
在194项试验中,19项(9.8%)为III期试验。大多数II期试验(146/175;83.4%)采用单臂或非对照设计。符合MCBS评分条件的试验(n = 78;40.2%)评估了56种不同的药物/方案。MCBS评分中位数为2分。只有三种药物/方案(均为细胞毒性疗法)的MCBS评分≥4分。在47项随机临床试验中,16项(8项II期;8项III期)试验结果为阳性。FI中位数为7(范围为2至52),10项试验(62.5%)的FQ < 10%,中位数为7%(范围为1%至59%)。
根据欧洲医学肿瘤学会-MCBS,STS试验中的大多数全身治疗并未带来显著的临床益处。此外,阳性随机试验往往不够稳健。新型STS治疗试验应使用具有临床意义的终点,并且实际疗效确认至关重要,尤其是对于稳健性较差的试验。