TY - JOUR
T1 - Performance status restriction in phase III cancer clinical trials
AU - Jaoude, Joseph Abi
AU - Kouzy, Ramez
AU - Mainwaring, Walker
AU - Lin, Timothy A.
AU - Miller, Austin B.
AU - Jethanandani, Amit
AU - Espinoza, Andres F.
AU - Pasalic, Dario
AU - Verma, Vivek
AU - VanderWalde, Noam A.
AU - Smith, Benjamin D.
AU - Smith, Grace L.
AU - David Fuller, C.
AU - Das, Prajnan
AU - Minsky, Bruce D.
AU - Rodel, Claus
AU - Fokas, Emmanouil
AU - Jagsi, Reshma
AU - Thomas, Charles R.
AU - Subbiah, Ishwaria M.
AU - Taniguchi, Cullen M.
AU - Ludmir, Ethan B.
N1 - Funding Information:
Funding: Dr. Taniguchi is supported by funding from NIH (award R01CA227517-01A1), Cancer Prevention & Research Institute of Texas (CPRIT; grant RR140012), V Foundation (V2015-22), the Kimmel Foundation, Sabin Family Foundation Fellowship, and the McNair Foundation. This manuscript is also supported by NIH P30 CA016672.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 Harborside Press. All rights reserved.
PY - 2020/10
Y1 - 2020/10
N2 - Background: Patients with good performance status (PS) tend to be favored in randomized clinical trials (RCTs), possibly limiting the generalizability of trial findings.We aimed to characterize trial-related factors associated with the use of PS eligibility criteria and analyze patient accrual breakdown by PS. Methods: Adult, therapeutic, multiarm phase III cancer-specific RCTs were identified through ClinicalTrials.gov. PS data were extracted from articles. Trials with a PS restriction ECOG score #1 were identified. Factors associated with PS restriction were determined, and the use of PS restrictions was analyzed over time. Results: In total, 600 trials were included and 238,213 patients had PS data. Of those trials, 527 studies (87.8%) specified a PS restriction cutoff, with 237 (39.5%) having a strict inclusion criterion (ECOG PS #1). Enrollment criteria restrictions based on PS (ECOG PS #1) were more common among industry-supported trials (P,.001) and lung cancer trials (P,.001). Nearly half of trials that led to FDA approval included strict PS restrictions. Most patients enrolled across all trials had an ECOG PS of 0 to 1 (96.3%). Even among trials that allowed patients with ECOG PS $2, only 8.1% of those enrolled had a poor PS. Trials of lung, breast, gastrointestinal, and genitourinary cancers all included ,5% of patients with poor PS. Finally, only 4.7% of patients enrolled in trials that led to subsequent FDA approval had poor PS. Conclusions: Use of PS restrictions in oncologic RCTs is pervasive, and exceedingly few patients with poor PS are enrolled. The selective accrual of healthier patients has the potential to severely limit and bias trial results. Future trials should consider a wider cancer population with close toxicity monitoring to ensure the generalizability of results while maintaining patient safety.
AB - Background: Patients with good performance status (PS) tend to be favored in randomized clinical trials (RCTs), possibly limiting the generalizability of trial findings.We aimed to characterize trial-related factors associated with the use of PS eligibility criteria and analyze patient accrual breakdown by PS. Methods: Adult, therapeutic, multiarm phase III cancer-specific RCTs were identified through ClinicalTrials.gov. PS data were extracted from articles. Trials with a PS restriction ECOG score #1 were identified. Factors associated with PS restriction were determined, and the use of PS restrictions was analyzed over time. Results: In total, 600 trials were included and 238,213 patients had PS data. Of those trials, 527 studies (87.8%) specified a PS restriction cutoff, with 237 (39.5%) having a strict inclusion criterion (ECOG PS #1). Enrollment criteria restrictions based on PS (ECOG PS #1) were more common among industry-supported trials (P,.001) and lung cancer trials (P,.001). Nearly half of trials that led to FDA approval included strict PS restrictions. Most patients enrolled across all trials had an ECOG PS of 0 to 1 (96.3%). Even among trials that allowed patients with ECOG PS $2, only 8.1% of those enrolled had a poor PS. Trials of lung, breast, gastrointestinal, and genitourinary cancers all included ,5% of patients with poor PS. Finally, only 4.7% of patients enrolled in trials that led to subsequent FDA approval had poor PS. Conclusions: Use of PS restrictions in oncologic RCTs is pervasive, and exceedingly few patients with poor PS are enrolled. The selective accrual of healthier patients has the potential to severely limit and bias trial results. Future trials should consider a wider cancer population with close toxicity monitoring to ensure the generalizability of results while maintaining patient safety.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85092324751&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85092324751&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.6004/jnccn.2020.7578
DO - 10.6004/jnccn.2020.7578
M3 - Article
C2 - 33022640
AN - SCOPUS:85092324751
SN - 1540-1405
VL - 18
SP - 1322
EP - 1326
JO - JNCCN Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network
JF - JNCCN Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network
IS - 10
ER -