Reanalysis of Urothelial Cancer Chemoimmunotherapy Trials With Differential Censoring

Tomer Meirson1,2,3, Jonathan Ofer1, Noa Zimhony-Nissim1

  • 1Davidoff Cancer Center, Rabin Medical Center, Petach Tikvah, Israel.

JAMA Network Open
|January 22, 2025
PubMed
Abstract

Insights

Differential censoring in clinical trials for advanced urothelial carcinoma may explain inconsistent results of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors combined with chemotherapy. This phenomenon, termed perceived-inferiority censoring, impacts trial interpretation.

Area of Science:

  • Oncology
  • Clinical Trials
  • Biostatistics

Background:

  • Three phase 3 trials (IMvigor130, KEYNOTE-361, CheckMate901) evaluated PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone for advanced urothelial carcinoma.
  • Inconsistent overall survival (OS) benefits were reported, with only CheckMate901 showing a significant OS advantage.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate differential censoring as a potential explanation for the conflicting results across these trials.
  • To analyze the impact of censoring imbalance on the reported treatment effects.

Main Methods:

  • A comparative effectiveness study involving censoring analysis of data from IMvigor130, KEYNOTE-361, and CheckMate901.
  • Kaplan-Meier curves were used to calculate censoring rates, with sensitivity analyses performed for excess censoring in control groups.

Main Results:

  • Excess censoring (>30%) was observed in the chemotherapy-only arms of KEYNOTE-361 and CheckMate901 for progression-free survival (PFS).
  • After adjustment, the PFS benefit of combination therapy was not significant in these trials.
  • Differential censoring in CheckMate901's OS analysis led to the loss of the observed OS benefit for nivolumab plus chemotherapy after sensitivity analysis.

Conclusions:

  • Differential censoring, potentially due to patients seeking alternative treatments ('perceived-inferiority censoring'), confounded the interpretation of results in KEYNOTE-361 and CheckMate901.
  • This censoring imbalance can compromise trial randomization and lead to biased comparisons, affecting the perceived efficacy of combination therapies.

Related Concept Videos

Censoring Survival Data01:09

Censoring Survival Data

Survival analysis is a statistical method used to analyze time-to-event data, often employed in fields such as medicine, engineering, and social sciences. One of the key challenges in survival analysis is dealing with incomplete data, a phenomenon known as "censoring." Censoring occurs when the event of interest (such as death, relapse, or system failure) has not occurred for some individuals by the end of the study period or is otherwise unobservable, and it might have many different...
60
Cancer Survival Analysis01:21

Cancer Survival Analysis

Cancer survival analysis focuses on quantifying and interpreting the time from a key starting point, such as diagnosis or the initiation of treatment, to a specific endpoint, such as remission or death. This analysis provides critical insights into treatment effectiveness and factors that influence patient outcomes, helping to shape clinical decisions and guide prognostic evaluations. A cornerstone of oncology research, survival analysis tackles the challenges of skewed, non-normally...
327
Comparing the Survival Analysis of Two or More Groups01:20

Comparing the Survival Analysis of Two or More Groups

Survival analysis is a cornerstone of medical research, used to evaluate the time until an event of interest occurs, such as death, disease recurrence, or recovery. Unlike standard statistical methods, survival analysis is particularly adept at handling censored data—instances where the event has not occurred for some participants by the end of the study or remains unobserved. To address these unique challenges, specialized techniques like the Kaplan-Meier estimator, log-rank test, and...
140