Journal of Clinical Oncology, Vol 3, 462-472, Copyright © 1985 by American Society of Clinical Oncology
Risk-benefit relationships in cancer clinical trials: the ECOG experience in non-small-cell lung cancer
RJ Simes
Although there is widespread recognition of the need to critically evaluate
risks and benefits for patients participating in clinical trials, the
actual implementation can be a difficult task. As an illustration of the
analytic difficulties, we reviewed the experience of the Eastern
Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) in advanced (inoperable) non-small-cell
lung cancer over the past ten years (1973 to 1983). Of 2,714 ECOG patients
analyzed, 15% showed objective tumor response. Median survival of all
patients was 4.2 months, with approximately one half of patient's survival
spent on protocol treatment. Thirty-nine percent of patients experienced at
least one episode of severe or worse toxicity from therapy. Chemotherapy
impact on this disease was assessed by examining trends in patient outcomes
over the decade studied and by comparisons with patients receiving no
treatment from earlier Veterans Administration Lung Protocols. Introducing
more intensive chemotherapy regimens over this period appears to have
resulted in some improvement in survival and response to therapy, but at
the expense of greater toxicity. Despite modest survival gains achieved by
these evolving trials, the community benefit from such trials seems clear,
both in identifying ineffective therapies (and avoiding their general use)
and as an important step in developing effective regimens. However, the
decision for an individual patient to participate in a trial may involve
difficult trade-offs between risk and benefit. This study suggests the need
to identify subgroups of patients unlikely to benefit from trial
participation and stresses the importance of incorporating patient
preferences in the final decision. Some of the problems in patient
communication are discussed.