PuSH - Publikationsserver des Helmholtz Zentrums München: Matching by OS prognostic score to construct external controls in lung cancer clinical trials.

Informationen

Hinweise zu Qualitätskriterien von Zeitschriften

Open-Access-Richtlinie der Helmholtz-Gemeinschaft 2016

CC Licencences

Metriken für Publikationen

Navigation

Startseite

English

EVA: Veröffentlichen

Neuer EVA Antrag

Recherche

Erweiterte Suche

Durchblättern nach ...

... HMGU-Autoren/Konsortien

... Organisationsstruktur

... Zeitschriften

... Publikationstypen

... Forschungsdaten

... Arbeitsgruppen

... Erscheinungsjahr

Publikationen im Überblick

Statistik

HGF Fortschrittsbericht

OA Publikationen

Eintragen

Neue Publikation eintragen

Neue Publikation holen aus...

...EVA

Fehlende Publikation melden

Highlights

Suche

Hilfe & Kontakt

Ansprechpartner

Hilfe

Datenschutz

Helmholtz Open Science

Bibliometrische Indikatoren

SHERPA/RoMEO

DOAJ

Export:

Text

Endnote (RIS) BIB

BibTeX

Loureiro, H. ; Roller, A.* ; Schneider, M.* ; Talavera Lopez, C.N. ; Becker, T.* ; Bauer-Mehren, A.*

Matching by OS prognostic score to construct external controls in lung cancer clinical trials.

Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 115, 333-341 (2023)

Verlagsversion

DOI

PMC

	Open Access Hybrid

Abstract
Metriken
Zusatzinfos

External controls (eControls) leverage historical data to create non-randomized control arms. The lack of randomization can result in confounding between the experimental and eControl cohorts. To balance potentially confounding variables between the cohorts, one of the proposed methods is to match on prognostic scores. Still, the performance of prognostic scores to construct eControls in oncology has not been analyzed yet. Using an electronic health record (EHR)-derived de-identified database, we constructed eControls using one of three methods: ROPRO, a state-of-the-art prognostic score, or either a propensity score composed of five (5Vars) or 27 covariates (ROPROvars). We compared the performance of these methods in estimating the overall survival (OS) hazard ratio (HR) of 11 recent advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. The ROPRO eControls had a lower OS HR error (median absolute deviation [MAD] [confidence interval {CI}] 0.072 [0.036, 0.185]), than the 5Vars (MAD [CI] 0.081 [0.025, 0.283]) and ROPROvars eControls (MAD [CI] 0.087 [0.054, 0.383]). Notably, the OS HR errors for all methods were even lower in the phase III studies. Moreover, the ROPRO eControl cohorts included, on average, more patients than the 5Vars (6.54%) and ROPROvars cohorts (11.7%). eControls matched with the prognostic score reproduced the controls more reliably than propensity scores composed of the underlying variables. Additionally, prognostic scores could allow eControls to be built on many prognostic variables without a significant increase in the variability of the propensity score, which would decrease the number of matched patients.

Impact Factor

Scopus SNIP

Altmetric

6.700

0.000