To the Editor Saluja et al1 evaluated the correlation of the European Society for Medical Oncology’s Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS) and the American Society of Clinical Oncology’s Value Framework (ASCO-VF) with absolute and relative survival measures, including the algorithmically calculated restricted mean survival time (RMST) derived from published Kaplan-Meier curves. Their conclusion regarding the shared inadequacy of ASCO-VF and ESMO-MCBS is based heavily on an unsubstantiated premise regarding RMST as a gold standard for evaluating survival benefit, and it is inconsistent with the results.
Identify all potential conflicts of interest that might be relevant to your comment.
Conflicts of interest comprise financial interests, activities, and relationships within the past 3 years including but not limited to employment, affiliation, grants or funding, consultancies, honoraria or payment, speaker's bureaus, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, royalties, donation of medical equipment, or patents planned, pending, or issued.
Err on the side of full disclosure.
If you have no conflicts of interest, check "No potential conflicts of interest" in the box below. The information will be posted with your response.
Not all submitted comments are published. Please see our commenting policy for details.
Dafni U, Cherny NI, de Vries EGE. Correcting the Conclusion in a Study of Frameworks for Measurement of Absolute or Relative Clinical Survival Benefit. JAMA Oncol. Published online October 17, 2019. doi:https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaoncol.2019.4091
Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.
Create a personal account or sign in to: