Post-progression treatment in cancer randomized trials: a cross-sectional study of trials leading to FDA approval and published trials between 2018 and 2020

BMC Cancer. 2023 May 17;23(1):448. doi: 10.1186/s12885-023-10917-z.

Abstract

Background: Suboptimal treatment upon progression may affect overall survival (OS) results in oncology randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We aim to assess the proportion of trials reporting post-progression treatment.

Methods: This cross-sectional analysis included two concurrent analyses. The first one examined all published RCTs of anti-cancer drugs in six high impact medical/oncology journals between January 2018 and December 2020. The second studied all US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved anti-cancer drugs during the same period. Included trials needed to study an anti-cancer drug in the advanced or metastatic setting. Data abstracted included the tumor type, characteristics of trials, and reporting and assessment of post-progression treatment.

Results: There were 275 published trials and 77 US FDA registration trials meeting inclusion criteria. Assessable post-progression data were reported in 100/275 publications (36.4%) and 37/77 approvals (48.1%). Treatment was considered substandard in 55 publications (n = 55/100, 55.0%) and 28 approvals (n = 28/37, 75.7%). Among trials with assessable post-progression data and positive OS results, a subgroup analysis identified substandard post-progression treatment in 29 publications (n = 29/42, 69.0%) and 20 approvals (n = 20/26, 76.9%). Overall, 16.4% of publications (45/275) and 11.7% of registration trials (9/77) had available post-progression data assessed as appropriate.

Conclusion: We found that most anti-cancer RCTs do not report assessable post-progression treatment. When reported, post-progression treatment was substandard in most trials. In trials reporting positive OS results and with assessable post-progression data, the proportion of trials with subpar post-progression treatment was even higher. Discrepancies between post-progression therapy in trials and the standard of care can limit RCT results' applicability. Regulatory rules should enforce higher requirements regarding post-progression treatment access and reporting.

Keywords: Cross-over; Drug regulation; Global oncology; Post-progression therapy; Randomized controlled trials.

MeSH terms

  • Antineoplastic Agents* / therapeutic use
  • Cross-Sectional Studies
  • Humans
  • Neoplasms* / drug therapy
  • Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
  • United States
  • United States Food and Drug Administration

Substances

  • Antineoplastic Agents