A Case Study Of Surrogate Outcomes For Overall Survival In The Treatment Of Chronic Myelogenous Leukemia

Published Sep 25, 2013
Exeter, UK - Ideally, licensing and value-for-money policy decisions on medications should be based on clinical trials that show benefits to final patient health outcomes, such as overall survival.  In order to speed up the approval process, however, those decisions often rely on surrogate or intermediate outcomes, such as laboratory measures, which are easier and cheaper to obtain.  Understanding and characterizing the relationship between the surrogate and the final outcome is an important step to pursing reliable, evidence-based decision making on health technologies. In the article “Complete Cytogenetic Response and Major Molecular Response as Surrogate Outcomes for Overall Survival in First-Line Treatment of Chronic Myelogenous Leukemia: A Case Study for Technology Appraisal on the Basis of Surrogate Outcomes Evidence,” published in Value in Health, the authors describe how two surrogate markers for patients with chronic myeloid leukemia were validated as surrogate outcomes for overall survival. Results of this study supported decisions issued by the National Institute of Health and Care Excellence on the public funding of three drug treatments for patients with chronic myeloid leukemia in England and Wales. Oriana Ciani, lead author and PhD candidate at the University of Exeter Medical School, comments: “Whilst it is recommended that acceptance of surrogate outcomes be based on several randomised controlled trials reporting a strong association between the treatment effect on both the surrogate and final outcomes, in the absence of such evidence, this case study shows that a sound and thorough validation may lead to the approval of a drug for a specific health condition.” The authors also recommend developing consensus on methods to incorporate the uncertainty associated with surrogate outcomes in future cost-effectiveness analyses.

Value in Health (ISSN 1098-3015) publishes papers, concepts, and ideas that advance the field of pharmacoeconomics and outcomes research as well as policy papers to help health care leaders make evidence-based decisions. The journal is published bi-monthly and has over 8,000 subscribers (clinicians, decision makers, and researchers worldwide).

International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) is a nonprofit, international, educational and scientific organization that strives to increase the efficiency, effectiveness, and fairness of health care resource use to improve health.

For more information: www.ispor.org

Related Stories

Measuring What Matters: Broadening the Scope of Health Economics Evaluation to Incorporate Well-Being

Jul 9, 2024

ISPOR announced the publication of a special themed section of research papers in Value in Health that offer insights into facets of economic evaluation aimed to incorporate well-being into decision making.

Confronting the Backlash Against QALYs: Key Insights From Leading Health Economists

Jun 18, 2024

ISPOR announced the publication of a collection of papers that examine the long-standing debate surrounding the use of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and alternative measures in healthcare decision making.

ISPOR Good Practices Report Offers Guidance for Using Real-World Data From EHRs in Health Technology Assessments

Jun 17, 2024

ISPOR announced the publication of an ISPOR Good Practices Report that proposes a framework for assessing the suitability of electronic health records data for use in health technology assessments. The report, “Assessing Real-World Data from Electronic Health Records for Health Technology Assessment: The SUITABILITY Checklist: A Good Practices Report of an ISPOR Task Force” was published in the June 2024 issue of Value in Health.
Your browser is out-of-date

ISPOR recommends that you update your browser for more security, speed and the best experience on ispor.org. Update my browser now

×