This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Publisher's Note Erratum (v27,p2109) Purchase Article View Shopping Cart Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a colleague Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Save to my personal folders Download to citation manager Rights & Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Dodd, L. E. Articles by Mooney, M. M. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Dodd, L. E. Articles by Mooney, M. M. Social Bookmarking                            What's this?

Blinded Independent Central Review of Progression-Free Survival in Phase III Clinical Trials: Important Design Element or Unnecessary Expense?

Lori E. Dodd, Edward L. Korn, Boris Freidlin, C. Carl Jaffe, Lawrence V. Rubinstein, Janet Dancey, Margaret M. Mooney

From the Branches of Biometric Research, Investigational Drug, Cancer Investigations, and Diagnostic Imaging, Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD

Corresponding author: Lori Dodd, PhD, National Cancer Institute, 6130 Executive Blvd, MSC 743, EPN Rm 8140, Rockville, MD 20892; e-mail: doddl{at}mail.nih.gov

ABSTRACT

Progression-free survival is an important end point in advanced disease settings. Blinded independent central review (BICR) of progression in randomized clinical trials has been advocated to control bias that might result from errors in progression assessments. However, although BICR lessens some potential biases, it does not remove all biases from evaluations of treatment effectiveness. In fact, as typically conducted, BICRs may introduce bias because of informative censoring, which results from having to censor unconfirmed locally determined progressions. In this article, we discuss the rationale for BICR and different ways of implementing independent review. We discuss the limitations of these approaches and review published trials that report implementing BICR. We demonstrate the existence of informative censoring using data from a randomized phase II trial. We conclude that double-blinded trials with consistent application of measurement criteria are the best means of ensuring unbiased trial results. When such designs are not practical, BICR is not recommended as a general strategy for reducing bias. However, BICR may be useful as an auditing tool to assess the reliability of marginally positive results.

NOTES

Authors’ disclosures of potential conflicts of interest and author contributions are found at the end of this article.

Published by the American Society of Clinical Oncology

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Facebook    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				P. A. Tang, G. R. Pond, and E. X. Chen Influence of an independent review committee on assessment of response rate and progression-free survival in phase III clinical trials Ann. Onc., October 29, 2009; (2009) mdp478v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. Gray, S. Bhattacharya, C. Bowden, K. Miller, and R. L. Comis Independent Review of E2100: A Phase III Trial of Bevacizumab Plus Paclitaxel Versus Paclitaxel in Women With Metastatic Breast Cancer J. Clin. Oncol., October 20, 2009; 27(30): 4966 - 4972. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Grothey and D. J. Sargent Reply to F. Montagnani et al J. Clin. Oncol., October 1, 2009; 27(28): e134 - e135. [Full Text] [PDF]

				H. Piessevaux, M. Buyse, W. De Roock, H. Prenen, M. Schlichting, E. Van Cutsem, and S. Tejpar Radiological tumor size decrease at week 6 is a potent predictor of outcome in chemorefractory metastatic colorectal cancer treated with cetuximab (BOND trial) Ann. Onc., August 1, 2009; 20(8): 1375 - 1382. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. A. Cannistra Phase II Trials in Journal of Clinical Oncology J. Clin. Oncol., July 1, 2009; 27(19): 3073 - 3076. [Full Text] [PDF]

				T. R. Fleming, M. D. Rothmann, and H. L. Lu Issues in Using Progression-Free Survival When Evaluating Oncology Products J. Clin. Oncol., June 10, 2009; 27(17): 2874 - 2880. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Meignan, E. Itti, S. Bardet, J. Lumbroso, V. Edeline, P. Olivier, T. V. Borght, O. Reman, G. Karcher, O. Mundler, et al. Development and Application of a Real-Time On-Line Blinded Independent Central Review of Interim Pet Scans to Determine Treatment Allocation in Lymphoma Trials J. Clin. Oncol., June 1, 2009; 27(16): 2739 - 2741. [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. Shamsi and R. H. Patt Onsite Image Evaluations and Independent Image Blinded Reads: Close Cousins or Distant Relatives? J. Clin. Oncol., April 20, 2009; 27(12): 2103 - 2104. [Full Text] [PDF]