A novel framework to assess haematology and oncology registration trials: The THEOREMM project

Author:

Olivier Timothée1ORCID,Haslam Alyson2ORCID,Burke Patricia3,Boutron Isabelle456ORCID,Naudet Florian789ORCID,Ioannidis John P. A.101112ORCID,Prasad Vinay2ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Oncology Geneva University Hospital Geneva Switzerland

2. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics University of California San Francisco San Francisco California USA

3. Patient Liverpool UK

4. Université Paris Cité and Université Sorbonne Paris Nord, Inserm, INRAe, Centre for Research in Epidemiology and Statistics (CRESS) Paris France

5. Centre d'Épidémiologie Clinique Hôpital Hôtel Dieu Paris France

6. Cochrane France Paris France

7. Inserm, CIC 1414 (Centre d'Investigation Clinique de Rennes) Rennes 1 University Rennes France

8. Inserm, Irset (Institut de recherche en santé, environnement et travail) Rennes 1 University Rennes France

9. Institut Universitaire de France Paris France

10. Meta‐Research Innovation Center at Stanford (METRICS) Stanford University Stanford California USA

11. Department of Medicine Stanford University School of Medicine Stanford California USA

12. Department of Epidemiology and Population Health Stanford University School of Medicine Stanford California USA

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundMethodological limitations affect a significant number of oncology and haematology trials, raising concerns about the applicability of their results. For example, a suboptimal control arm or limited access to best care upon progression may skew the trial results toward a benefit in the experimental arm. Beyond the fact that such limitations do not prevent drugs reaching the market, other assessment tools, such as those developed by professional societies—ESMO‐MCBS and ASCO Value Framework—do not integrate these important shortcomings.MethodsWe propose creating a novel framework with the scope of assessing registration cancer clinical trials in haematology and oncology (randomized or single arm)—that is trials leading to a marketing authorization. The main steps of the methods are (1) assembling a scientific board; (2) defining the scope, goal and methods through pre‐specified, pre‐registered and protocolized methodology; (3) preregistration of the protocol; (4) conducting a scoping review of limitations and biases affecting oncology trials and assessing existing scores or methods; (5) developing a list of features to be included and assessed within the framework; (6) assessing each feature through a questionnaire sent to highly cited haematologists and oncologists involved in clinical trials; and (7) finalizing the first version of framework.ResultsNot applicable.ConclusionsOur proposal emerged in response to the lack of consideration for key limitations in current trial assessments. The goal is to create a framework specifically designed to assess single trials leading to marketing authorization in the field of oncology and haematogy.

Publisher

Wiley

Reference44 articles.

1. Global Oncology Trends2021. Accessed February 18 2024.https://www.iqvia.com/insights/the‐iqvia‐institute/reports‐and‐publications/reports/global‐oncology‐trends‐2021

2. A framework for assessing the impact of accelerated approval

3. 2023 FDA approvals

4. Industry Involvement and Transparency in the Most Cited Clinical Trials, 2019-2022

5. GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3