Original article
Strength of Validation for Surrogate End Points Used in the US Food and Drug Administration's Approval of Oncology Drugs

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mayocp.2016.02.012Get rights and content

Abstract

Objective

To determine the strength of the surrogate-survival correlation for cancer drug approvals based on a surrogate.

Participants and Methods

We performed a retrospective study of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) database, with focused searches of MEDLINE and Google Scholar. Among cancer drugs approved based on a surrogate end point, we examined previous publications assessing the strength of the surrogate-survival correlation. Specifically, we identified the percentage of surrogate approvals lacking any formal analysis of the strength of the surrogate-survival correlation, and when conducted, the strength of such correlations.

Results

Between January 1, 2009, and December 31, 2014, the FDA approved marketing applications for 55 indications based on a surrogate, of which 25 were accelerated approvals and 30 were traditional approvals. We could not find any formal analyses of the strength of the surrogate-survival correlation in 14 out of 25 accelerated approvals (56%) and 11 out of 30 traditional approvals (37%). For accelerated approvals, just 4 approvals (16%) were made where a level 1 analysis (the most robust way to validate a surrogate) had been performed, with all 4 studies reporting low correlation (r≤0.7). For traditional approvals, a level 1 analysis had been performed for 15 approvals (50%): 8 (53%) reported low correlation (r≤0.7), 4 (27%) medium correlation (r>0.7 to r<0.85), and 3 (20%) high correlation (r≥0.85) with survival.

Conclusions

The use of surrogate end points for drug approval often lacks formal empirical verification of the strength of the surrogate-survival association.

Section snippets

Data Source

The FDA provides a record of hematology and oncology drug approvals and safety notifications on their website (http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/InformationOnDrugs/ucm279174.htm) and in related links. Each relevant webpage was downloaded and is provided in the Supplemental Figure 1 (available online at http://www.mayoclinicproceedings.org). Further information for each approval was obtained from the Drugs@FDA website, which includes information regarding the approval of new oncology drugs as well as

Results

Between January 1, 2009, and December 31, 2014, the FDA approved marketing applications for 83 oncologic indications: 25 (30%) were AAs and 58 (70%) were TAs. Of the AAs, 24 (96%) were based on response rate (or duration of response) and 1 (4%) was based on PFS. Of the TAs, 28 (48%) were based on either improved OS or quality of life—patient-centered end points—and 30 (52%) were based on a surrogate end point, such as response rate (7 indications, 12% of TAs) or PFS or disease-free survival (23

Discussion

We found that most cancer drug approvals (55 of 83 [66%]) are based on a surrogate end point. Although the FDA grants TA based on established surrogate end points, this standard is lax. Only 3 of 30 such approvals (10%) have shown high correlation in a level 1 surrogate analysis, widely considered a prerequisite for clinical or regulatory decisions.15 Of concern, 11 of 30 TAs (37%) had no formal analyses of the surrogate-survival correlation. Accelerated approvals are granted on the basis of a

Conclusion

Most new cancer drugs are approved on the basis of surrogate end points. The standard for such approvals is that surrogates are reasonably likely to predict clinical efficacy or established in the case of AA and TA, respectively. We found that, practically, this standard is lax, with 56% and 37% of AAs and TAs, respectively, based on surrogates made without any formal analysis of the strength of the surrogate-survival correlation. Additional follow-up to existing trials or new trials were

Acknowledgments

The views and opinions of the authors do not reflect the institutions with which they are affiliated.

References (75)

  • I. Sekine et al.

    Response rate as an endpoint for evaluating new cytotoxic agents in phase II trials of non-small-cell lung cancer

    Ann Oncol

    (1998)
  • K. Tsujino et al.

    Response rate is associated with prolonged survival in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer treated with gefitinib or erlotinib

    J Thorac Oncol

    (2009)
  • S.J. Mandrekar et al.

    Endpoints in phase II trials for advanced non-small cell lung cancer

    J Thorac Oncol

    (2010)
  • K.R. Johnson et al.

    Response rate or time to progression as predictors of survival in trials of metastatic colorectal cancer or non-small-cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis

    Lancet Oncol

    (2006)
  • N. Penel et al.

    Activity endpoints reported in soft tissue sarcoma phase II trials: quality of reported endpoints and correlation with overall survival

    Crit Rev Oncol Hematol

    (2013)
  • P.G. Rose et al.

    Assessment of tumor response as a surrogate endpoint of survival in recurrent/platinum-resistant ovarian carcinoma: a Gynecologic Oncology Group study

    Gynecol Oncol

    (2010)
  • K.T. Flaherty et al.

    Surrogate endpoints for overall survival in metastatic melanoma: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

    Lancet Oncol

    (2014)
  • H. Hayashi et al.

    Postprogression survival for first-line chemotherapy of patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer

    Ann Oncol

    (2012)
  • I. Sekine et al.

    Progressive disease rate as a surrogate endpoint of phase II trials for non-small-cell lung cancer

    Ann Oncol

    (1999)
  • H. Hayashi et al.

    Postprogression survival in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer who receive second-line or third-line chemotherapy

    Clin Lung Cancer

    (2013)
  • K. Hotta et al.

    Progression-free survival and overall survival in phase III trials of molecular-targeted agents in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer

    Lung Cancer

    (2013)
  • A. Mauguen et al.

    Surrogate endpoints for overall survival in chemotherapy and radiotherapy trials in operable and locally advanced lung cancer: a re-analysis of meta-analyses of individual patients' data

    Lancet Oncol

    (2013)
  • K. Hotta et al.

    Time to progression as a surrogate marker for overall survival in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer

    J Thorac Oncol

    (2009)
  • E. Bria et al.

    Progression-free survival as primary endpoint in randomized clinical trials of targeted agents for advanced renal cell carcinoma: correlation with overall survival, benchmarking and power analysis

    Crit Rev Oncol Hematol

    (2015)
  • K.R. Johnson et al.

    Evaluating surrogacy metrics and investigating approval decisions of progression-free survival (PFS) in metastatic renal cell cancer: a systematic review

    Ann Oncol

    (2015)
  • F. Petrelli et al.

    Surrogate end points and postprogression survival in renal cell carcinoma: an analysis of first-line trials with targeted therapies

    Clin Genitourin Cancer

    (2013)
  • F. Petrelli et al.

    Early tumour shrinkage as a prognostic factor and surrogate end-point in colorectal cancer: a systematic review and pooled-analysis

    Eur J Cancer

    (2015)
  • A. Kay et al.

    Randomized controlled trials in the era of molecular oncology: methodology, biomarkers, and end points

    Ann Oncol

    (2012)
  • V. Prasad et al.

    The misguided ethics of crossover trials

    Contemp Clin Trials

    (2014)
  • V. Prasad et al.

    Characteristics of exceptional or super responders to cancer drugs

    Mayo Clin Proc

    (2015)
  • J.R. Johnson et al.

    End points and United States Food and Drug Administration approval of oncology drugs

    J Clin Oncol

    (2003)
  • R. Pazdur

    Endpoints for assessing drug activity in clinical trials

    Oncologist

    (2008)
  • R. Sridhara et al.

    Review of oncology and hematology drug product approvals at the US Food and Drug Administration between July 2005 and December 2007

    J Natl Cancer Inst

    (2010)
  • K. Miller et al.

    Paclitaxel plus bevacizumab versus paclitaxel alone for metastatic breast cancer

    N Engl J Med

    (2007)
  • D. Carpenter et al.

    Reputation and precedent in the bevacizumab decision

    N Engl J Med

    (2011)
  • V. Prasad et al.

    The strength of association between surrogate end points and survival in oncology: a systematic review of trial-level meta-analyses

    JAMA Intern Med

    (2015)
  • M. Buyse et al.

    The validation of surrogate endpoints in meta-analyses of randomized experiments

    Biostatistics

    (2000)
  • Cited by (0)

    For editorial comment, see page 689

    View full text