Overall survival as a safety guardrail in cancer drug trials

Surrogate endpoints have accelerated access to oncology drugs but often leave uncertainty about net patient benefit. We propose a pragmatic framework that recentres overall survival (OS) as both the definitive patient-centred efficacy endpoint and a safety guardrail capable of detecting net harm that intermediate measures may miss. The framework comprises four pillars. First, designing for harm exclusion: protocols should prespecify a clinically meaningful OS harm margin, power event-driven follow-up to exclude or detect that margin with precision, and mandate independent data monitoring committee oversight. Analyses should match explicit estimands and pair hazard ratios with restricted mean survival time to accommodate non-proportional hazards. Second, handling crossover and post-progression therapy: when crossover is ethical or unavoidable, trials should adopt treatment-policy estimands for the primary question and prespecified causal sensitivity analyses. Protocols must map access to guideline-concordant post-progression care, record uptake and timing, and distinguish biological dilution from health-system scarcity. Third, using surrogates with discipline: when OS cannot feasibly be primary, sponsors should submit a disease-specific surrogate dossier summarising trial- and patient-level validation and quantifying expected translation to OS, while continuing to collect OS and assess it against the prespecified harm boundary. Fourth, preventing missingness-driven bias: continue outcome collection after treatment discontinuation, set triggers for asymmetric loss to follow-up, and perform structured tipping-point analyses. We recommend a regulatory traffic-light aligned to OS maturity, green (traditional approval), amber (time-limited with confirmatory obligations), red (standards unmet), and conditioning economic conclusions (QALYs, net monetary benefit) on OS harm exclusion. Operationalising OS as a safety guardrail protects patients and strengthens the credibility and value of cancer trials.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Cancer Policy
Published
2025-11-09
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcpo.2025.100666
Primary Topic
Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Overall survival as a safety guardrail in cancer drug trials

Rashidul Alam Mahumud
Journal of Cancer Policy
Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
article

Overall survival as a safety guardrail in cancer drug trials

Rashidul Alam Mahumud
article en

Abstract

Surrogate endpoints have accelerated access to oncology drugs but often leave uncertainty about net patient benefit. We propose a pragmatic framework that recentres overall survival (OS) as both the definitive patient-centred efficacy endpoint and a safety guardrail capable of detecting net harm that intermediate measures may miss. The framework comprises four pillars. First, designing for harm exclusion: protocols should prespecify a clinically meaningful OS harm margin, power event-driven follow-up to exclude or detect that margin with precision, and mandate independent data monitoring committee oversight. Analyses should match explicit estimands and pair hazard ratios with restricted mean survival time to accommodate non-proportional hazards. Second, handling crossover and post-progression therapy: when crossover is ethical or unavoidable, trials should adopt treatment-policy estimands for the primary question and prespecified causal sensitivity analyses. Protocols must map access to guideline-concordant post-progression care, record uptake and timing, and distinguish biological dilution from health-system scarcity. Third, using surrogates with discipline: when OS cannot feasibly be primary, sponsors should submit a disease-specific surrogate dossier summarising trial- and patient-level validation and quantifying expected translation to OS, while continuing to collect OS and assess it against the prespecified harm boundary. Fourth, preventing missingness-driven bias: continue outcome collection after treatment discontinuation, set triggers for asymmetric loss to follow-up, and perform structured tipping-point analyses. We recommend a regulatory traffic-light aligned to OS maturity, green (traditional approval), amber (time-limited with confirmatory obligations), red (standards unmet), and conditioning economic conclusions (QALYs, net monetary benefit) on OS harm exclusion. Operationalising OS as a safety guardrail protects patients and strengthens the credibility and value of cancer trials.

Journal of Cancer PolicyVol. 46
University of Southern Queensland (AU)
Openalex Percentile: Top 58%
Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Overall survival as a safety guardrail in cancer drug trials — Rashidul Alam Mahumud · Journal of Cancer Policy (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS