N/A
N=20,033
Survival Endpoints in Women Treated for Metastatic Breast Cancer: Contribution of Real-life Databases
Metastatic Breast Cancer
Bottom Line
View on ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03676257 ↗Enrolled (actual)
20,033
Serious AEs
—
Results posted
Dec 2025
Primary outcome: Primary: Overall Survival (OS) for Commonly Prescribed First-line Treatment Strategies — 23.7; 13.5; 30.9; 17.4 months
Study Design & Population
- Study type
- Observational
- Phase
- N/A
- Interventions
- Chemotherapy (exclusive) (Drug); Endocrine therapy (exclusive) (Drug); Combination of endocrine therapy and chemotherapy (Drug); Chemotherapy and targeted treatment (Drug); Combination of endocrine therapy and targeted treatment (Drug); Combination of chemotherapy, endocrine therapy and targeted treatment (Drug)
- Age
- Adult, Older Adult · 18+ yrs
- Sex
- Female
- Sponsor
- Institut Bergonié
- Primary completion
- Dec 2023
Outcome Measures
| Outcome | Result | p-value |
|---|---|---|
| PRIMARY Overall Survival (OS) for Commonly Prescribed First-line Treatment Strategies |
23.7; 13.5; 30.9; 17.4; 48.8; 40.3 | — |
| SECONDARY Real-world Progression-free Survival (rwPFS) for Commonly Prescribed First-line Treatment Strategies |
5.0; 5.4; 4.4; 4.4; 12.5; 5.9 | — |
| SECONDARY Association Between Overall Survival and Real-world Progression-free Survival for Commonly Prescribed First-line Treatment Strategies |
0.58; 0.81; 0.33; 0.67; 0.66; 0.43 | — |
Summary
Overall survival (OS) is considered the most reliable cancer endpoint and used by the Health Rregulatory authorities (HRA). OS presents multiple advantages in cancer randomized controlled trials (RCT): it is universally accepted as a measure of clinical benefit for the patient; it is objectively defined, both in terms of events and date of incidence; it is easily and precisely measured and thus reproducible; it can be exhaustively collected. As such, OS has been validated by HRAs. On the other hand, OS presents some limitations. Observing a benefit on OS may require a large number of patients and/or considerable time for patient follow-up. Costs for trials may be increased, and there might be delays in the introduction of possible beneficial treatments for patients. The development of alternative endpoints that could capture treatment benefit appropriately and be measurable earlier, is central for the evolution of clinical research in oncology.
Real world data (RWD) are defined as other sources than clinical trials such as: electronic medical records, registries, insurance claims, pharmacy records, death certificates and other patient-generated data.
This research is aimed at (i) describing the existing endpoints of survival in real-life setting, (ii) comparing the correlation at individual level with data to clinical trials for related to anti-HER2 targeted therapies and endocrine therapies in MBC. We will investigate the individual correlation between candidate surrogate endpoints and overall survival in a population-based record-computerized database centralizing data on about 20,000 patients from 2008 to 2017 in France.
This work should lead to the estimation of various time-to event endpoints (e.g. OS, PFS, etc), in the real-life setting, for mBC patients. In addition, we will estimate their individual correlation with OS, which should help us highlight potential surrogate endpoints in this setting. We will focuss on three distinct population, accounting for a large population of mBS patients: : patients treated with anti-HER2 targeted agents, patients treated with endocrine therapies and elderly population.
Eligibility Criteria
ELIGIBILITY
- female patients older than 18 years
- diagnosis of metastatic breast cancer (de novo disease or first metastatic recurrence) between January 1, 2008, and December 31, 2017
- received a fist-line systemic treatment such as chemotherapy, endocrine therapy or targeted therapy, whatever the sequence (monotherapy or combination of therapies using distinct mechanisms of actions, i.e., polytherapy).
Data sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03676257). Outcome figures and adverse-event rates are extracted automatically from the registry's posted results and are provided for clinician reference, not as a substitute for the primary publication.