TY - JOUR
T1 - Interim monitoring in a treatment strategy trial with a composite primary endpoint
AU - Kang, Minhee
AU - Grund, Birgit
AU - Hunsberger, Sally
AU - Glidden, David
AU - Volberding, Paul
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 Elsevier Inc.
PY - 2019/11
Y1 - 2019/11
N2 - When a clinical trial has a composite endpoint and a comparison of treatment strategies with multiple intervention components, interim data reviews by a data safety and monitoring board (DSMB) can be challenging as the data evolve on multiple fronts. We illustrate with a study in the treatment of Kaposi sarcoma (KS), an HIV-associated cancer with a multi-faceted disease presentation. The study, ACTG-A5264/AMC-067, was a 1:1 randomized trial to compare two strategies: immediate initiation of etoposide with antiretroviral therapy (ART), or ART with delayed etoposide upon disease progression. The outcome was a composite endpoint that included the following events, ordered from worst to best in the following three categories: (1) KS progression at 48 weeks, death, initiation of alternate KS treatment, loss to study follow-up; (2) stable KS; and (3) partial or complete KS response at 48 weeks. We present the interim results on the composite endpoint and the individual components, where components favored different study arms at an interim review. To facilitate interim data monitoring for complex trials, we recommend clear communications between the study team and the DSMB prior to the initiation of the trial on the need for a composite endpoint, the intentions behind the defined strategies, and relative importance of individual components of the composite endpoint. We also recommend flexibility in the timing of data reviews by the DSMB to interpret emerging data in multiple dimensions. Clinicaltrials.gov
AB - When a clinical trial has a composite endpoint and a comparison of treatment strategies with multiple intervention components, interim data reviews by a data safety and monitoring board (DSMB) can be challenging as the data evolve on multiple fronts. We illustrate with a study in the treatment of Kaposi sarcoma (KS), an HIV-associated cancer with a multi-faceted disease presentation. The study, ACTG-A5264/AMC-067, was a 1:1 randomized trial to compare two strategies: immediate initiation of etoposide with antiretroviral therapy (ART), or ART with delayed etoposide upon disease progression. The outcome was a composite endpoint that included the following events, ordered from worst to best in the following three categories: (1) KS progression at 48 weeks, death, initiation of alternate KS treatment, loss to study follow-up; (2) stable KS; and (3) partial or complete KS response at 48 weeks. We present the interim results on the composite endpoint and the individual components, where components favored different study arms at an interim review. To facilitate interim data monitoring for complex trials, we recommend clear communications between the study team and the DSMB prior to the initiation of the trial on the need for a composite endpoint, the intentions behind the defined strategies, and relative importance of individual components of the composite endpoint. We also recommend flexibility in the timing of data reviews by the DSMB to interpret emerging data in multiple dimensions. Clinicaltrials.gov
KW - Composite endpoint
KW - Futility
KW - Interim monitoring
KW - Treatment strategy trial
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85073225667&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85073225667&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.cct.2019.105846
DO - 10.1016/j.cct.2019.105846
M3 - Article
C2 - 31520741
AN - SCOPUS:85073225667
SN - 1551-7144
VL - 86
JO - Contemporary Clinical Trials
JF - Contemporary Clinical Trials
M1 - 105846
ER -