Clinical outcome assessment trends in clinical trials-Contrasting oncology and non-oncology trials

被引:1
|
作者
Kim, Yeonju [1 ]
Gilbert, Mark R. [1 ]
Armstrong, Terri S. [1 ]
Celiku, Orieta [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] NCI, NIA, Neuro Oncol Branch, Bethesda, MD USA
[2] NCI, NIA, Neuro Oncol Branch, 37 Convent Dr, Bethesda, MD 20892 USA
来源
CANCER MEDICINE | 2023年 / 12卷 / 16期
关键词
clinical trials; oncology; patient outcome assessment; patient-reported outcomes; quality of life; PATIENT-REPORTED OUTCOMES; RESPONSE ASSESSMENT; RECOMMENDATIONS; OPPORTUNITIES; CHALLENGES; INCLUSION; STANDARDS; QUALITY; CANCER; ERA;
D O I
10.1002/cam4.6325
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Background: Clinical outcome assessments (COAs) are key to patient-centered evaluation of novel interventions and supportive care. COAs are particularly informative in oncology where a focus on how patients feel and function is paramount, but their incorporation in trial outcomes have lagged that of traditional survival and tumor responses. To understand the trends of COA use in oncology and the impact of landmark efforts to promote COA use, we computationally surveyed oncology clinical trials in ClinicalTrials.gov comparing them to the rest of the clinical research landscape. Methods: Oncology trials were identified using medical subject heading neoplasm terms. Trials were searched for COA instrument names obtained from PROQOLID. Regression analyses assessed chronological and design-related trends. Results: Eighteen percent of oncology interventional trials initiated 1985-2020 (N = 35,415) reported using one or more of 655 COA instruments. Eighty-four percent of the COA-using trials utilized patient-reported outcomes, with other COA categories used in 4-27% of these trials. Likelihood of COA use increased with progressing trial phase (OR = 1.30, p < 0.001), randomization (OR = 2.32, p < 0.001), use of data monitoring committees (OR = 1.26, p < 0.001), study of non-FDA-regulated interventions (OR = 1.23, p = 0.001), and in supportive care versus treatment-focused trials (OR = 2.94, p < 0.001). Twenty-six percent of non-oncology trials initiated 1985-2020 (N = 244,440) reported COA use; they had similar COA-use predictive factors as oncology trials. COA use increased linearly over time (R = 0.98, p < 0.001), with significant increases following several individual regulatory events. Conclusion: While COA use across clinical research has increased over time, there remains a need to further promote COA use particularly in early phase and treatment-focused oncology trials.
引用
收藏
页码:16945 / 16957
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] The Use of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Phase I Oncology Clinical Trials
    Coleman, Robert L.
    Beck, J. Thaddeus
    Baranda, Joaquina C.
    Jacobs, Ira
    Smoyer, Karen E.
    Lee, Lauren J.
    Askerova, Zemfira
    McGinnis, Justin
    Ganti, Apar Kishor
    ONCOLOGY, 2021, : 444 - 453
  • [2] Improving the clinical meaning of surrogate endpoints: An empirical assessment of clinical progression in phase III oncology trials
    Sherry, Alexander D.
    Lin, Timothy A.
    McCaw, Zachary R.
    Beck, Esther J.
    Kouzy, Ramez
    Abi Jaoude, Joseph
    Passy, Adina H.
    Miller, Avital M.
    Kupferman, Gabrielle S.
    Fuller, Clifton David
    Thomas, Charles R.
    Koay, Eugene J.
    Tang, Chad
    Msaouel, Pavlos
    Ludmir, Ethan B.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2024, 155 (11) : 1939 - 1943
  • [3] Clinical Trials and Personalized Medicine in Oncology?
    Arnold, Dirk
    Bokemeyer, Carsten
    ONKOLOGIE, 2010, 33 : 25 - 29
  • [4] Endpoints in oncology clinical trials
    Kilickap, Saadettin
    Demirci, Umut
    Karadurmus, Nuri
    Dogan, Mutlu
    Akinci, Bulent
    Sendur, Mehmet Ali Nahit
    JOURNAL OF BUON, 2018, 23 : S1 - S6
  • [5] Assessment of the value of confirming responses in clinical trials in oncology
    Perez-Gracia, JL
    Muñoz, M
    Williams, G
    Wu, J
    Carrasco, E
    Garcia-Ribas, I
    Peiro, A
    Lopez-Picazo, JM
    Gurpide, A
    Chopitea, A
    Martín-Algarra, S
    García-Foncillas, J
    Blatter, J
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2005, 41 (11) : 1528 - 1532
  • [6] Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology Clinical Trials
    Wen, Patrick Y.
    Chang, Susan M.
    Van den Bent, Martin J.
    Vogelbaum, Michael A.
    Macdonald, David R.
    Lee, Eudocia Q.
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2017, 35 (21) : 2439 - +
  • [7] Challenges in launching multinational oncology clinical trials in India
    Saini, Kamal S.
    Agarwal, Gaurav
    Jagannathan, Ramesh
    Metzger-Filho, Otto
    Saini, Monika L.
    Mistry, Khurshid
    Ali, Raghib
    Gupta, Sudeep
    SOUTH ASIAN JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2013, 2 (01) : 44 - 49
  • [8] Quantitative Imaging Assessment for Clinical Trials in Oncology
    Hersberger, Katherine E.
    Mendiratta-Lala, Mishal
    Fischer, Rocky
    Kaza, Ravi K.
    Francis, Isaac R.
    Olszewski, Mirabella S.
    Harju, John F.
    Shi, Wei
    Manion, Frank J.
    Al-Hawary, Mahmoud M.
    Sahai, Vaibhav
    JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL COMPREHENSIVE CANCER NETWORK, 2019, 17 (12): : 1505 - +
  • [9] Trends in clinical trials in surgical oncology: Implications for outcomes research
    Guller, U
    Blumenstein, BA
    CLINICAL THERAPEUTICS, 2003, 25 (02) : 684 - 698
  • [10] Clinical Trials and the Role of the Oncology Clinical Trials Nurse
    Ness, Elizabeth A.
    Royce, Cheryl
    NURSING CLINICS OF NORTH AMERICA, 2017, 52 (01) : 133 - +