Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 7, 2025

Establishing a Competing Risk Regression Nomogram Model for Survival Data
Published on: October 23, 2020
The validity of progression-free survival 2 as a surrogate trial end point for overall survival
Rachel G Woodford1,2, Deborah D-X Zhou3, Peey-Sei Kok1
1National Health and Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Centre, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Background:
Overall survival (OS) is the gold-standard end point for oncology trials. However, the availability of multiple therapeutic options after progression and crossover to receive investigational agents confound and delay OS data maturation. Progression-free survival 2 (PFS-2), defined as the time from randomization to progression on first subsequent therapy, has been proposed as a surrogate for OS. Using a meta-analytic approach, the authors aimed to assess the association between OS and PFS-2 and compare this with progression-free survival 1 (PFS-1) and the objective response rate (ORR).
Methods:
An electronic literature search was performed to identify randomized trials of systemic therapies in advanced solid tumors that reported PFS-2 as a prespecified end point. Correlations between OS and PFS-2, OS and PFS-1, and OS and ORR as hazard ratios (HRs) or odds ratios (ORs) were assessed via linear regression weighted by trial size.
Results:
Thirty-eight trials were included, and they comprised 19,031 patients across 8 tumor types. PFS-2 displayed a moderate correlation with OS (r = 0.67; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.08-0.69). Conversely, correlations of ORR (r = 0.12; 95% CI, 0.00-0.13) and PFS-1 (r = 0.21; 95% CI, 0.00-0.33) were poor. The findings for PFS-2 were consistent for subgroup analyses by treatment type (immunotherapy vs nonimmunotherapy: r = 0.67 vs 0.67), survival post progression (<12 vs ≥12 months: r = 0.86 vs 0.79), and percentage not receiving subsequent treatment (<50% vs ≥50%: r = 0.70 vs 0.63).
Conclusions:
Across diverse tumors and therapies, the treatment effect on PFS-2 correlated moderately with the treatment effect on OS. PFS-2 performed consistently better than PFS-1 and ORR, regardless of postprogression treatment and postprogression survival. PFS-2 should be included as a key trial end point in future randomized trials of solid tumors.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Comparing the Survival Analysis of Two or More Groups
Actuarial Approach
Consider the example of a high-risk surgical procedure with significant early-stage mortality. A two-year clinical study is conducted,...
Kaplan-Meier Approach
Assumptions of Survival Analysis
Cancer Survival Analysis
Survival Curves
The Kaplan-Meier estimator is the most common method for constructing survival curves. This...

