How oncology trials measure what they claim to measure: central review versus investigator assessment, cure-fraction and adaptive-dosing models, and patient-reported outcomes as an endpoint rather than a footnote.
A first-cycle "adaptive therapy score," derived from a mathematical model of competing drug-sensitive and drug-resistant tumor cell populations, more strongly predicted time to progression than any standard PSA metric across two independent prostate cancer cohorts (n=53 total).
The multicenter PRO B trial randomized 924 patients with metastatic breast cancer across 52 German centers to weekly alert-based electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) monitoring or usual quarterly PRO monitoring, with fatigue at 6 months as the primary endpoint.
A systematic review and trial-level meta-analysis of 21 randomized trials (9,165 pooled patients) in HR+/HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer compares investigator (local site)-assessed progression-free survival against blinded independent central review (BICR), asking whether the added cost and complexity of BICR is actually needed.
A pooled, secondary mixture-cure-model analysis of three mature Phase III trials (HIMALAYA, CheckMate 9DW, RATIONALE-301) plus a large real-world cohort estimates how many patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) achieve durable, cure-like outcomes on first-line immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) regimens.