The ASCENT trial reports impressive results with a median overall survival (OS) increased from 6.7 months to 12.1 months with sacituzumab govitecan over single-agent chemotherapy, in metastatic triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) patients in second and subsequent line of therapy. We described design features in the ASCENT trial casting doubt on the extrapolation of the reported results to real world patients. First, the open-label design may exaggerate the effect of the experimental arm. Second, the choice of progression-free-survival (PFS) as a primary endpoint, debatable in metastatic TNBC, can lead to biases: early stopping rules may exaggerate efficacy results and informative censoring can bias PFS results interpretation. Third, the control arm was not a complete “physician’s choice”: it was restricted, preventing from using effective agents in this setting, and leading to a substandard control arm. Fourth and lastly, dose reduction and supportive care recommendations for the experimental drug were different between the trial protocol and the FDA labels, and favored the experimental arm as compared with the control arm. In conclusion, we described four design features in the ASCENT trial having the potential to favor the experimental arm or to penalize the control arm. It thus remains uncertain in which extent the reported outcomes will translate in the real world. Efforts should be made to avoid trial biases that will eventually prevent to conclude about their true impact in patients when applied broadly.Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Sacituzumab govitecan in metastatic triple negative breast cancer (TNBC): Four design features in the ASCENT trial potentially favored the experimental arm.
