Twelve ESMO Congress 2022 breakthroughs: practicing oncologists' perceptions and potential application on presented data
Background: At the ESMO Congress 2022, numerous clinical trial outcomes were presented, highlighting the importance of structuring data to weigh treatment burden against benefits.
Materials and Methods: A narrative non-systematic review of 12 selected oral presentations was conducted, focusing on trial methodology, potential flaws, clinical benefit, and implementability.
- Included 10 phase III trials, 1 randomized phase II trial, and 1 phase II trial.
- Quality of life and/or patient-reported outcomes were evaluated in 7 out of 12 trials.
- None of the trials reporting PFS data provided information to exclude informative censoring bias.
- Trials reporting OS data did not address potential flaws due to undesirable crossover and imbalance between study groups regarding post-progression treatments.
- For the 11 reviewed randomized trials, the ESMO-MCBS grade of the new intervention varied from 1 to 5.
Conclusions: The review confirms the high quality and clinical relevance of current cancer research but suggests that factors affecting PFS and OS analysis should be structurally addressed. To maintain affordable and sustainable cancer care, it is recommended to consider including an ESMO-MCBS threshold in drug appraisal processes by regulatory authorities.
During the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Congress 2022, outcome data of a great number of trials were presented, some of which are expected to change daily clinical practice. For the attending medical oncologist, it is important to structure this vast amount of data in a way that facilitates a trade-off between treatment burden and benefit. Key questions are...Are the conclusions made supported by the presented data?
How robust are the data presented, from the perspectives of trial methodology and potential flaws. Which benefit could the average cancer patient derive from the new treatment in real-world settings? Is this benefit sufficient to justify adoption of the new treatment in daily practice as standard of care?
Click for Source
