Definition for the Assessment of Time-to-event Endpoints in CANcer Trials (DATECAN-1)

Cancer Clinical Trial

— DATECAN-1  

Official title:

Definition for the Assessment of Time-to-event Endpoints in CANcer Trials (DATECAN-1) : Formal Consensus Method for the Development of Guidelines for Standardized Time-to-event Endpoints' Definitions in Cancer Clinical Trials

Clinical Trial Details — Status: Active, not recruiting

Administrative data

• NCT number: NCT03676010
• Other study ID #: IB2009-DATECAN-1
• Status: Active, not recruiting
• Start date: September 2009
• Est. completion date: December 2023

Study information

• Verified date: May 2022
• Source: Institut Bergonié
• Contact: n/a
• Is FDA regulated: No
• Study type: Observational

Clinical Trial Summary

In randomised phase III cancer clinical trials, the most objectively defined and only validated time-to-event endpoint is overall survival (OS). The appearance of new types of treatments and the multiplication of lines of treatment have resulted in the use of surrogate endpoints for overall survival such as progression-free survival (PFS), or time-to-treatment failure. Their development is strongly influenced by the necessity of reducing clinical trial duration, cost and number of patients. However, while these endpoints are frequently used, they are often poorly defined and definitions can differ between trials which may limit their use as primary endpoints. Moreover, this variability of definitions can impact on the trial's results by affecting estimation of treatments' effects. The aim of the Definition for the Assessment of Time-to-event Endpoints in CANcer trials (DATECAN) project is to provide recommendations for standardised definitions of time-to-event endpoints in randomised cancer clinical trials. We will use a formal consensus methodology based on experts' opinions which will be obtained in a systematic manner. Definitions will be independently developed for several cancer sites, including pancreatic, breast, head and neck and colon cancer, as well as sarcomas and gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GISTs). The DATECAN project should lead to the elaboration of recommendations that can then be used as guidelines by researchers participating in clinical trials. This process should lead to a standardisation of the definitions of commonly used time-to-event endpoints, enabling appropriate comparisons of future trials' results.

Description:

There is no methodology to provide appropriate definitions for survival endpoints. As such, including or excluding an event in a survival endpoint definition is only based on opinion from experts. For this reason, we launched the DATECAN-1 project in 2009. Its objective is to elaborate standardized definitions for survival endpoints in randomized clinical trials, based on a rigorous and validated consensus methodology. Once this project will be finalized (2012), guidelines for the definitions of survival endpoints to be used in clinical trials will be available. This collaborative work involves the network of the statisticians from Regional Comprehensive Cancer Centers (Bordeaux, Lille, Montpellier, Dijon, Paris, Toulouse), the network of the Cancer Data Centers (CTD) of the French National Cancer Institute (INCA; Montpellier, Bordeaux, Curie, Dijon-GERCOR) as well as the Headquarters from the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC). This project is supported by a 2009 grant from the French League Against Cancer . The DATECAN-1 project relies on a validated formal consensus method (Fitch K. The Rand/UCLA appropriateness method user's manual. 2001). This consensus approach formalizes the degree of agreement among experts by identifying and selecting the points on which experts agree, disagree or are undecided. The guidelines are subsequently based on agreement points. It is a rigorous and explicit method since it involves international experts in clinical trials in the field of the targeted cancer localizations. This method involves two rounds of rating (questionnaires) and an in-person meeting to address points for which consensus has not been reached yet. We published the methodology of the consensus process (Bellera et al. Eur J Cancer 2013). Guidelines have now been published following the international consensus process, for pancreatic cancer, sarcoma and GIST, beast cancer and renal cell carcinoma (See "Citations filed" below). For other localization (head and neck, stomach, colon): guidelines are ongoing.

Recruitment information / eligibility

• Status: Active, not recruiting
• Enrollment: 196
• Est. completion date: December 2023
• Est. primary completion date: January 2015
• Accepts healthy volunteers: No
• Gender: All
• Age group: 18 Years and older

Eligibility

Inclusion Criteria:

• Sarcoma / GIST
• Breast cancer
• Pancreatic cancer
• Renal cell carcinoma
• adjuvant colon cancer

Exclusion Criteria :

• Individual patient data unavailable

Related Conditions & MeSH terms

• Cancer

Intervention

Other:
• Sarcoma and GIST
No Intervention : Consensus of international experts to provide definition of survival endpoints to be used in randomized controlled trials to assess treatment efficacy.
• Breast cancer
No intervention : Consensus of international experts to provide definition of survival endpoints to be used in randomized controlled trials to assess treatment efficacy.
• Pancreatic cancer
No intervention : Consensus of international experts to provide definition of survival endpoints to be used in randomized controlled trials to assess treatment efficacy.
• Renal cell carcinoma
No intervention : Consensus of international experts to provide definition of survival endpoints to be used in randomized controlled trials to assess treatment efficacy.
• Colon cancer
No intervention : Consensus of international experts to provide definition of survival endpoints to be used in randomized controlled trials to assess treatment efficacy (adjuvant setting).
• Solid tumours undergoing image-guided tumor ablation
No intervention : Consensus of international experts to provide definition of survival endpoints to be used in randomized controlled trials to assess treatment efficacy.

Locations

Country	Name	City	State
France	Institut Bergonié	Bordeaux
France	Centre Georges François Leclerc	Dijon
France	Institut du Cancer de Montpellier	Montpellier

Sponsors (4)

Lead Sponsor	Collaborator
Institut Bergonié	Centre Georges Francois Leclerc, Institut du Cancer de Montpellier - Val d'Aurelle, National Cancer Institute, France

Country where clinical trial is conducted

France, 

References & Publications (7)

Bellera CA, Penel N, Ouali M, Bonvalot S, Casali PG, Nielsen OS, Delannes M, Litiere S, Bonnetain F, Dabakuyo TS, Benjamin RS, Blay JY, Bui BN, Collin F, Delaney TF, Duffaud F, Filleron T, Fiore M, Gelderblom H, George S, Grimer R, Grosclaude P, Gronchi A — View Citation

Bellera CA, Pulido M, Gourgou S, Collette L, Doussau A, Kramar A, Dabakuyo TS, Ouali M, Auperin A, Filleron T, Fortpied C, Le Tourneau C, Paoletti X, Mauer M, Mathoulin-Pelissier S, Bonnetain F. Protocol of the Definition for the Assessment of Time-to-eve — View Citation

Bonnetain F, Bonsing B, Conroy T, Dousseau A, Glimelius B, Haustermans K, Lacaine F, Van Laethem JL, Aparicio T, Aust D, Bassi C, Berger V, Chamorey E, Chibaudel B, Dahan L, De Gramont A, Delpero JR, Dervenis C, Ducreux M, Gal J, Gerber E, Ghaneh P, Hamme — View Citation

Cohen R, Vernerey D, Bellera C, Meurisse A, Henriques J, Paoletti X, Rousseau B, Alberts S, Aparicio T, Boukovinas I, Gill S, Goldberg RM, Grothey A, Hamaguchi T, Iveson T, Kerr R, Labianca R, Lonardi S, Meyerhardt J, Paul J, Punt CJA, Saltz L, Saunders M — View Citation

Gourgou-Bourgade S, Cameron D, Poortmans P, Asselain B, Azria D, Cardoso F, A'Hern R, Bliss J, Bogaerts J, Bonnefoi H, Brain E, Cardoso MJ, Chibaudel B, Coleman R, Cufer T, Dal Lago L, Dalenc F, De Azambuja E, Debled M, Delaloge S, Filleron T, Gligorov J, — View Citation

Kramar A, Negrier S, Sylvester R, Joniau S, Mulders P, Powles T, Bex A, Bonnetain F, Bossi A, Bracarda S, Bukowski R, Catto J, Choueiri TK, Crabb S, Eisen T, El Demery M, Fitzpatrick J, Flamand V, Goebell PJ, Gravis G, Houede N, Jacqmin D, Kaplan R, Malav — View Citation

Puijk RS, Ahmed M, Adam A, Arai Y, Arellano R, de Baere T, Bale R, Bellera C, Binkert CA, Brace CL, Breen DJ, Brountzos E, Callstrom MR, Carrafiello G, Chapiro J, de Cobelli F, Coupe VMH, Crocetti L, Denys A, Dupuy DE, Erinjeri JP, Filippiadis D, Gangi A, Gervais DA, Gillams AR, Greene T, Guiu B, Helmberger T, Iezzi R, Kang TW, Kelekis A, Kim HS, Kroncke T, Kwan S, Lee MW, Lee FT, Lee EW Jr, Liang P, Lissenberg-Witte BI, Lu DS, Madoff DC, Mauri G, Meloni MF, Morgan R, Nadolski G, Narayanan G, Newton I, Nikolic B, Orsi F, Pereira PL, Pua U, Rhim H, Ricke J, Rilling W, Salem R, Scheffer HJ, Sofocleous CT, Solbiati LA, Solomon SB, Soulen MC, Sze D, Uberoi R, Vogl TJ, Wang DS, Wood BJ, Goldberg SN, Meijerink MR. Consensus Guidelines for the Definition of Time-to-Event End Points in Image-guided Tumor Ablation: Results of the SIO and DATECAN Initiative. Radiology. 2021 Dec;301(3):533-540. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2021203715. Epub 2021 Sep 28. — View Citation

Outcome

Type	Measure	Description	Time frame	Safety issue
Primary	Number of Outcomes Defined Following the Consensus Process	Number of time-to-event outcomes defined following the consensus process	1 year after the consitution of the panel of experts