Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2014 Aug;146(3):669-73.
doi: 10.1007/s10549-014-3047-y. Epub 2014 Jul 14.

Using quality-adjusted progression-free survival as an outcome measure to assess the benefits of cancer drugs in randomized-controlled trials: case of the BOLERO-2 trial

Vakaramoko Diaby  1 , Georges Adunlin, Askal Ayalew Ali, Rima Tawk
Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Using quality-adjusted progression-free survival as an outcome measure to assess the benefits of cancer drugs in randomized-controlled trials: case of the BOLERO-2 trial

Vakaramoko Diaby et al. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2014 Aug.

Abstract

The aim of this study is to estimate the quality-adjusted progression-free survival (QAPFS) as an effectiveness measure for the treatment arms of the BOLERO-2 trial. For each treatment arm of the trial, QAPFS was estimated by multiplying the overall health utility weights associated with progression-free survival (PFS) (accounting for utility decrements associated with the adverse events of treatments) by the corresponding mean PFS time. Health utility data were obtained from the literature, while mean PFS times were estimated through a survival analysis of the reconstructed individual patient data of the BOLERO-2 trial. PFS (robust mean, (95 % robust confidence interval)) was 44.73 weeks (41.03; 48.43) for Everolimus + Exemestane and 22.98 weeks (19.88; 26.08) for Placebo + Exemestane. The QAPFS (robust mean, (95 % robust confidence interval)) for the treatment arms of the trial was 30.09 (27.60; 32.58) for Everolimus + Exemestane and 16.27 (14.07; 18.46) for Placebo + Exemestane, respectively. Using QAPFS as an outcome measure provides a complete picture of the benefit induced by the treatment arms of the BOLERO-2 trial. The benefit of Everolimus + Exemestane over Placebo + Exemestane observed in the trial is maintained in this analysis. The approach and estimates obtained as part of our analysis can serve as a basis for cost effectiveness analyses of the treatment arms of the BOLERO-2 trial.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of interest The authors have declared that they have no financial conflicts of interest.

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Drummond MF, Schwartz JS, Jönsson B, et al. Key principles for the improved conduct of health technology assessments for resource allocation decisions. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2008;24:244–258. - PubMed
    1. Verduyn SC, Biesma B, Schramel F, et al. Estimating quality adjusted progression free survival of first-line treatments for EGFR mutation positive non-small cell lung cancer patients in The Netherlands. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2012;10:108. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Baselga J, Campone M, Piccart M, et al. Everolimus in postmenopausal hormone-receptor-positive advanced breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2012;366:520–529. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Burris HA, Lebrun F, Rugo HS, et al. Health-related quality of life of patients with advanced breast cancer treated with everolimus plus exemestane versus placebo plus exemestane in the phase 3, randomized, controlled, BOLERO-2 trial. Cancer. 2013;119(10):1908–1915. - PubMed
    1. Kim E, Ko S, Kang H. Mapping the cancer-specific EO-RTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-BR23 to the generic EQ-5D in metastatic breast cancer patients. Qual Life Res. 2012;21:1193–1203. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources