Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Role and Potential of Surrogate Outcomes in Clinical Trials: Have We Made Any Progress in the Past Decade?

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Book cover Proceedings of the Fourth Seattle Symposium in Biostatistics: Clinical Trials

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Statistics ((LNSP,volume 1205))

Abstract

Randomized clinical trials are the standard method for evaluating new interventions or comparing existing ones. Trials which use clinical outcomes as the primary outcome can be large, require lengthy follow-up, and can be expensive. For these reasons, researchers have sought to use intermediate outcomes such as biomarkers as a substitute or surrogate for the clinical outcome. Over a decade ago, this practice had become common. Fleming and DeMets (Ann Intern Med 125:605–613, 1996) reported many cases where the use of a biomarker as a surrogate outcome failed to reliably assess the effect of the intervention, in some cases missing harmful effects including mortality. Recently, the Institute of Medicine (IOM) reviewed the state of the art and came to similar conclusions that biomarkers have often proved to be unreliable as a surrogate [Committee on Qualifications of Biomarkers and Surrogate Endpoints in Chronic Disease, Michael C, Ball J (eds) (2010) Evaluation of biomarkers and surrogate endpoints in chronic disease. National Academies Press, Washington]. They proposed that biomarkers must meet certain criteria including analytic validity, strong correlation with the clinical outcome and the ability to capture the full effects of the intervention. The use of a biomarker as a surrogate must be done so in the context of its intended use, and done so with great caution. While the IOM report further clarifies the necessary requirements of a potential biomarker as a surrogate, the report still recommends caution in using surrogate outcomes in final phases of intervention evaluation as did Fleming and DeMets (Ann Intern Med 125:605–613, 2004).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Fleming TR, DeMets DL (1996) Surrogate endpoints in clinical trials: are we being mislead? Ann Intern Med 125:605–613

    Google Scholar 

  2. Committee on Qualifications of Biomarkers and Surrogate Endpoints in Chronic Disease, Michael C, Ball J (eds) (2010) Evaluation of biomarkers and surrogate endpoints in chronic disease. National Academies Press, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  3. Prentice RL (1989) Surrogate endpoints in clinical trials: definition and operational criteria. Stat Med 8:431–440

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Fleming TR (1992) Evaluating therapeutic interventions: some issues and experiences (with discussion and rejoinder). Stat Sci 7:428–456

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Fleming TR (1990) Evaluation of active control trials in AIDS. J Acquir Immun Defic Syndr 3(Suppl 2):S82–S87

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  6. Johnson JR, Temple R (1985) Food and Drug Administration requirements for approval of new anticancer drugs. Cancer Treat Rep 69:1155–1159

    Google Scholar 

  7. Ellenberg SS, Hamilton JM (1989) Surrogate endpoints in clinical trials: cancer. Stat Med 8:405–413

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Fleming TR, Prentice RL, Pepe MS, Glidden D (1994) Surrogate and auxiliary endpoints in clinical trials, with potential applications in cancer and AIDS research. Stat Med 3:955–968

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Herson J (1989) The use of surrogate endpoints in clinical trials. Stat Med 8:403–404

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Kosorok MR, Fleming TR (1993) Using surrogate failure time data to increase cost effectiveness in clinical trials. Biometrika 80:823–833

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Machado SG, Gail MH, Ellengerg SS (1990) On the use of laboratory markers as surrogates for clinical endpoints in the evaluation of treatment for HIV infection. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 3:1065–1073

    Google Scholar 

  12. Pepe MS, Reilly M, Fleming TR (1994) Auxiliary outcome data and the mean score method. J Stat Plan Inference 42:137–160

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Wittes J, Lakatos E, Probstfield J (1989) Surrogate endpoints in clinical trials: cardiovascular diseases. Stat Med 8:415–425

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Ellenberg SS (1991) Surrogate end points in clinical trials [Editorial]. BMJ 302:63–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Fleming TR (1994) Surrogate markers in AIDS and cancer trials. Stat Med 13:1423–1435

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Lagakos SW, Hoth DF (1992) Surrogate markers in AIDS: where are we? Ann Intern Med 116:599–601

    Google Scholar 

  17. Boissel JP, Collet JP, Moleur P, Haugh M (1992) Surrogate endpoints: a basis for a rationale approach. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 43:235–244

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. The Cardiac Arrhythmia Suppression Trial (CAST) Investigators (1989) Preliminary report: effect of encainide and flecainide on mortality in a randomized trial of arrhythmia suppression after myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 321:406–412

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Echt DS, Liebson PR, Mitchell LB, Peters RW, Obias-Manno D, Barker AH et al (1991) Mortality and morbidity in patients receiving encainide, flecainide, or placebo. The Cardiac Arrhythmia Suppression Trial. N Engl J Med 324:781–788

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. The Cardiac Arrhythmia Suppression Trial Investigators (1992) Effect of the antiarrhythmic agent moricizine on survival after myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 327:227–233

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Coplen SE, Antman EM, Berlin JA, Hewitt P, Chalmers TC (1990) Efficacy and safety of quinidine therapy for maintenance of sinus rhythm after cardioversion. A meta-analysis of randomized control trials. Circulation 82:1106–1116

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Hine LK, Laird N, Hewitt P, Chalmers TC (1989) Meta-analytic evidence against prophylactic use of lidocaine in acute myocardial infarction. Arch Intern Med 149:2694–2698

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. MacMahon S, Collins R, Peto R, Koster RW, Yusuf S (1988) Effects of prophylactic lidocaine in suspected acute myocardial infarction. An overview of results from the randomized, controlled trials. JAMA 260:1910–1916

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Rossouw JE, Lewis B, Rifkind BM (1990) The value of lowering cholesterol after myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 323:1112–1119

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. The Coronary Drug Project Research Group (1975) Clofibrate and niacin in coronary heart disease. JAMA 231:360–381

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Gordon DJ (1994) Cholesterol lowering and total mortality. In: Rifkind BM (ed) Contemporary issues in cholesterol lowering: clinical and population aspects. Marcel Dekker, New York

    Google Scholar 

  27. (1994) Randomised trial of cholesterol lower in 4444 patients with coronary heart disease: the Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study (4S). Lancet 344:1383–1389

    Google Scholar 

  28. Fogoros RN (2001) The Baycol recall, what it means, Heart Health Center, About.com, Aug 13, 2001

    Google Scholar 

  29. Barter PJ, Caulfield M, Eriksson M, Grundy SM, Kastelein JJ, Komajda M, Lopez-Sendon J, Mosca L, Tardiff JC, Waters DD, Shear CL, Revkin JH, Buhr KA, Fisher MR, Tall AR, Brewer B, ILLUMINATE Investigators (2007) Effects of torcetrapib in patients at high risk for coronary events. N Engl J Med 357:2109–2122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Stampfer M, Colditz G (1991) Estrogen replacement therapy and coronary heart disease, a quantitative assessment of the epidemiological evidence. Prev Med 20:47–63

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Grady D, Rueben SB, Pettiti DB et al (1992) Hormone therapy to prevent heart disease and prolong life in postmenopausal women. Ann Int Med 117:1102–1109

    Google Scholar 

  32. Writing Group for the Women’s Health Initiative Investigators (2002) Risks and benefits of estrogen plus progestin in healthy postmenopausal women. Principal results from the Women’s Health Initiative randomized controlled trial. JAMA 288(3):321–333

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Women’s Health Initiative Investigators Steering Committee (2004) Effects of conjugated equine estrogen in postmenopausal women with a hysterectomy: the Women’s Health Initiative randomized clinical trial. JAMA 291:1701–1712

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Coronary Drug Project Research Group (1973) The Coronary Drug Project: Findings leading to discontinuation of the 2.5-mg/day estrogen group. JAMA 226:652–657

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Collins R, Peto R, MacMahon S, Hebert P, Fiebach NH, Eberlein KA et al (1990) Blood pressure, stroke and coronary heart disease. Part 2, short-term reduction in blood pressure: overview of randomized drug trials in their epidemiological context. Lancet 335:827–838

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Hypertension Detection and Follow-up Program Cooperative Group (1979) Five-year finding of the hypertension detection and follow-up program. 1. Reduction in mortality of persons with high blood pressure: including mild hypertension. JAMA 242:2562–2571

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Furberg CD, Berglund G, Manolio TA, Psaty BM (1994) Overtreatment and undertreatment of hypertention. J Intern Med 235:387–397

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Psaty BM, Heckbert SR, Koepsell TD, Siscovick DS, Lemaitre R, Smith NL et al (1996) The risk of incident myocardial infarction associated with anti-hypertensive drug therapies [Abstract]. Circulation 91:925

    Google Scholar 

  39. Held PH, Yusuf S, Furberg CD (1989) Calcium channel blockers in acute myocardial infarction and unstable angina: an overview. BMJ 299:1187–1192

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Feldman AM, Bristow MR, Parmley WW, Carson PE, Pepine CJ, Gilbert EM et al (1993) Effects of vesnarinone on morbidity and mortality in patients with heart failure. Vesnarinone Study Group. N Engl J Med 329:149–155

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Packer M, Carver JR, Rodehoffer JR, Ivanhoe RJ, DiBianco R, Zeldis SM et al (1991) Effect of oral milrinone on mortality in severe chronic heart failure. The PROMISE Study Research Group. N Engl J Med 325:1468–1475

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Packer M, Rouleau J, Swedberg K, Pitt B, Fisher L, Klepper M et al (1993) Effect of flosequinan on survival in chronic heart failure: preliminary results of the PROFILE study [Abstract]. Circulation 88(Suppl I):I–301

    Google Scholar 

  43. Moertel CG (1984) Improving the efficiency of clinical trials: a medical perspective. Stat Med 3:455–468

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Sargent DJ, Rubinstein L, Schwarz L, Dancey JE, Gastonis C, Dodd E, Shankar LK (2009) Validation of novel imaging methodologies for use as cancer clinical trial end-points. Eur J Cancer 45:290–299

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. IOM (2007) Cancer-biomarkers: The promises and challenges of improving detection and treatment. The National Academies Press, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  46. IOM (2009) Accelerating the development of biomarkers for drug safety. The National Academies Press, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  47. Sargent DJ, Wieand HS, Haller DG, Gray R et al (2005) Disease-free survival vs overall survival as primary end point for adjuvant colon cancer cancer studies: individual patient data from 20,898 patients on 18 randomized trials. J Clin Oncol 23:8664–8670

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. (1992) Modulation of fluorouracil by leucovorin in patients with advanced colorectal cancer: evidence in terms of response rate. Advanced Colorectal Cancer Meta-Analysis Project. J Clin Oncol 10:896–903

    Google Scholar 

  49. Peto R, Doll R, Buckley JD, Sporn MB (1981) Can dietary beta-carotene materially reduce cancer rates? Nature 290:201–208

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. The ATBC Study Group (2003) Incidence of cancer and mortality following α-tocopherol and β-carotene supplementation. A postintervention follow-up. JAMA 290(4):476–485

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Omenn GS, Goodman GE, Thornquist MD, Balmes J, Cullen MR, Glass A, Keogh JP, Meyskens FL, Valanis B, Williams JH, Barnhart S, Hammar S (1996) Effects of a combination of beta carotene and vitamin A on lung cancer and cardiovascular disease. N Engl J Med 334:1150–1155

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Hennekens CH, Buring JE, Manson JE, Stampfer M, Rosner B, Cook N, Belanger C, LaMotte F, Gaziano JM, Ridker PM, Willett W, Peto R (1996) Lack of effect of long term supplementation with beta carotene on the incidence of malignant neoplasms and cardiovascular disease. N Engl J Med 334(18):1145–1149

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Kang JH, Cook NR, Manson JE, Buring JE, Albert CM, Grodstein F (2009) Vitamin E, vitamin C, beta carotene, and cognitive function among women with or at risk of cardiovascular disease: The Women’s Antioxidant and Cardiovascular Study. Circulation 119:2772–2780

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Lee IM, Cook IR, Manson JE, Buring JE, Hennekens CH (1999) Beta-carotene supplementation and incidence of cancer and cardiovascular disease: the Women’s Health Study. J Natl Cancer Inst 91:2102–2106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Ridker PM, Cushman M, Stampfer MJ, Tracy RP, Hennekens CH (1997) Inflammation, aspirin, and the risk of cardiovascular disease in apparently healthy men. N Engl J Med 336:973–979

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Hlatky M (2011) The cost-effectiveness of rosuvastatin therapy JUPITER (justification for the use of statins in prevention: an intervention trial evaluating rosuvastatin). J Am Coll Cardiol 57:792–793

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Heidenreich PA, Alloggiamento T, Melsop K, McDonald KM, Go AS, Hlatky MA (2001) The prognostic value of troponin in patients with non-ST elevation acute coronary syndromes. J Am Coll Cardiol 38:478–485

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Wallace TW, Abdullah SM, Drazner MH et al (2006) Prevalence and determinants of troponin T elevation in the general population. Circulation 113:1958–1965

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Thygesen K, Alpert J, White H et al (2007) Joint Task Force for the redefinition of myocardial infarction, Universal definition of myocardial infarction. Eur Heart J 28:2525–2538

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Solomon SD, Uno H, Lewis EF, Eckardt KU, Lin J, Burdmann EA, de Zeeuw D, Ivanovich P, Levey AS, Parfrey P, Remuzzi G, Singh AK, Toto R, Huang F, Rossert J, McMurray JJ, Pfeffer MA (2010) Trial to Reduce Cardiovascular Events with Aranesp Therapy (TREAT) Investigators. N Engl J Med 363(12):1146–1155

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. INSIGHT-ESPIRIT Study Group and SILCAAT Steering Committee (2009) Interleukin-2 therapy in patients with HIV infection. N Engl J Med 361:1548–1559

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Biostatistics & Medical Informatics, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 610 Walnut Street, Madison, WI, 53726, USA

    David L. DeMets

Authors
  1. David L. DeMets
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to David L. DeMets .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Washington, Department of Biostatistics, Seattle, 98195-7232, Washington, USA

    Thomas R. Fleming

  2. University of Washington, Department of Biostatistics, Seattle, 98195-7232, Washington, USA

    Bruce S. Weir

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this paper

Cite this paper

DeMets, D.L. (2013). The Role and Potential of Surrogate Outcomes in Clinical Trials: Have We Made Any Progress in the Past Decade?. In: Fleming, T., Weir, B. (eds) Proceedings of the Fourth Seattle Symposium in Biostatistics: Clinical Trials. Lecture Notes in Statistics(), vol 1205. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-5245-4_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation