Current Issue

View Larger Image

Past Issues Free Subscriptions
Sponsored
Keywords



GEN Poll

 More »
Dec 13, 2011

OS vs. PFS

Should the primary endpoint for approval of cancer drugs change to progression-free survival from overall survival?

Yes
 
  42.1%
No
 
  42.1%
Undecided
 
  15.8%

Suggest a Poll
More Polls » View Results »

FDA’s success in removing Avastin’s metastatic breast cancer (MBC) indication has sparked a longstanding debate in drug development circles: Should the primary endpoint for regulatory sanction remain overall survival (OS) or should it change to progression-free survival (PFS)? In Avastin’s case, initial accelerated approval, in combination with paclitaxel, for MBC was based on PFS data. But last year FDA’s CDER recommended that MBC be withdrawn since subsequent studies showed only a small improvement in OS. FDA also noted that Avastin’s PFS improvement was not worth the risk of associated side effects. Avastin maker Genentech and parent Roche countered that PFS should be the primary endpoint, because it could be objectively measured and because the EU recognized it as an oncology endpoint. Where do you stand?

Related Content

GEN News Highlights

MORE RELATED GEN NEWS HIGHLIGHTS

Insight & Intelligence™

MORE RELATED INSIGHT & INTELLIGENCE™

GEN Articles

MORE RELATED GEN ARTICLES

GEN Webinars

View »

GEN Web Briefs

View »

GEN Poll

More » Poll Results » Archive »

GEN’s Hall of Shame

Will you be voting for any of the candidates on GEN’s Hall of Shame list in the next election?

Suggest a Poll