Meirson Tomer, Ofer Jonathan, Zimhony-Nissim Noa, Bareket-Samish Avital, Markel Gal, Neiman Victoria, Cherny Nathan, Goldstein Daniel A, Gyawali Bishal, Tannock Ian, Rosenbaum Eli
Davidoff Cancer Center, Rabin Medical Center, Petach Tikvah, Israel.
Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.
JAMA Netw Open. 2025 Jan 2;8(1):e2455630. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.55630.
Three similar phase 3 randomized clinical trials have investigated PD-1/PD-L1 (programmed cell death 1 protein/programmed cell death 1 ligand 1) inhibitors in combination with platinum-based chemotherapy vs chemotherapy alone as first-line treatment for advanced urothelial carcinoma (IMvigor130, atezolizumab; KEYNOTE-361, pembrolizumab; and CheckMate901, nivolumab). Only CheckMate901 reported overall survival (OS) benefit for the combination. The reason for these inconsistent results is unclear.
To explore whether differential censoring-that is, censoring imbalance between the study groups-is a possible explanation for these inconsistent findings.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This comparative effectiveness study involved a censoring analysis of data from IMvigor130, KEYNOTE-361, and CheckMate901, which enrolled patients between 2016 and 2022. Participants included patients in these 3 trials.
Participation in 1 of the 3 trials.
The primary outcomes were censoring rates adjusted for treatment effects. Censoring rates were calculated from the Kaplan-Meier (KM) curves. When excess censoring in the control group of open-label trials was found, the hypothesis was that better-performing patients might be dropping out to seek alternative treatments; a sensitivity analysis was conducted in which their survival was assumed to be similar to that of the longest surviving patients in the control group. Treatment effects of the censoring-adjusted KM curves were calculated using the 2-sided log-rank test.
The 3 trials involved a total of 2162 patients (1640 male [76%]; age range, 65-69 years) Analysis of progression-free survival (PFS) curves demonstrated no differential censoring in IMvigor130, but there was more than 30% excess censoring in the chemotherapy-only groups in KEYNOTE-361 and CheckMate901 trials. After sensitivity analysis, the PFS benefit was no longer significant in either study (KEYNOTE-361, adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.13 [95% CI, 0.95-1.35]; CheckMate901, adjusted HR, 1.17 [0.96-1.44]). Analysis of OS curves demonstrated no differential censoring in IMvigor130 or KEYNOTE-361, but there was more censoring in the chemotherapy-only group in CheckMate901. After sensitivity analysis, the OS benefit of adding nivolumab to chemotherapy was lost (before adjustment, HR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.63-0.95]; P = .01; adjusted HR, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.77-1.17]; P = .64).
In this comparative effectiveness study, differential censoring explained the inconsistent results reported in the evaluated trials. The term perceived-inferiority censoring is suggested to describe a phenomenon wherein better-performing patients are aware of their treatment and drop out to pursue alternative therapeutic options; it is possible that this occurred in the open-label KEYNOTE-361 and CheckMate901 trials. Such censoring confounds randomization and interpretation of clinical trials, since a larger experimental group is compared with a selected group of controls with poorer prognosis.
三项类似的3期随机临床试验研究了程序性死亡蛋白1(PD-1)/程序性死亡配体1(PD-L1)抑制剂联合铂类化疗与单纯化疗作为晚期尿路上皮癌一线治疗的效果(IMvigor130研究,使用阿替利珠单抗;KEYNOTE-361研究,使用帕博利珠单抗;CheckMate901研究,使用纳武利尤单抗)。只有CheckMate901研究报告联合治疗有总生存期(OS)获益。这些结果不一致的原因尚不清楚。
探讨差异删失(即研究组间删失不平衡)是否可能是这些不一致结果的一个解释。
设计、设置和参与者:这项比较疗效研究对IMvigor130、KEYNOTE-361和CheckMate901研究的数据进行了删失分析,这些研究在2016年至2022年期间招募患者。参与者包括这三项试验中的患者。
参与三项试验中的一项。
主要结局是调整治疗效应后的删失率。删失率根据Kaplan-Meier(KM)曲线计算。当在开放标签试验的对照组中发现过度删失时,推测可能是表现较好的患者退出以寻求其他治疗;进行了一项敏感性分析,假设他们的生存期与对照组中生存期最长的患者相似。使用双侧对数秩检验计算经删失调整的KM曲线的治疗效应。
三项试验共纳入2162例患者(1640例男性[76%];年龄范围65 - 69岁)。无进展生存期(PFS)曲线分析显示,IMvigor130研究中无差异删失,但在KEYNOTE-361和CheckMate901研究中,单纯化疗组存在超过30%的过度删失。敏感性分析后,两项研究中PFS获益均不再显著(KEYNOTE-361研究,调整后风险比[HR]为1.13[95%CI,0.95 - 1.35];CheckMate901研究,调整后HR为1.17[0.96 - 1.44])。OS曲线分析显示,IMvigor130或KEYNOTE-361研究中无差异删失,但CheckMate901研究中单纯化疗组存在更多删失。敏感性分析后,化疗加用纳武利尤单抗的OS获益消失(调整前,HR为0.77[95%CI,0.63 - 0.95];P = 0.01;调整后HR为0.95[95%CI,0.77 - 1.17];P = 0.64)。
在这项比较疗效研究中,差异删失解释了所评估试验中报告的不一致结果。建议使用“感知劣势删失”一词来描述表现较好的患者知晓自身治疗情况并退出以寻求其他治疗选择的现象;在开放标签的KEYNOTE-361和CheckMate901试验中可能发生了这种情况。这种删失混淆了临床试验的随机化和解释,因为将较大的试验组与一组预后较差的选定对照组进行比较。