Leveraging external control data in the design and analysis of neuro-oncology trials: Pearls and perils

Abstract Background Randomized controlled trials have been the gold standard for evaluating medical treatments for many decades but they are often criticized for requiring large sample sizes. Given the urgent need for better therapies for glioblastoma, it has been argued that data collected from pat...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Neuro-oncology (Charlottesville, Va.) Va.), 2024-05, Vol.26 (5), p.796-810
Hauptverfasser: Polley, Mei-Yin C, Schwartz, Daniel, Karrison, Theodore, Dignam, James J
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 810
container_issue 5
container_start_page 796
container_title Neuro-oncology (Charlottesville, Va.)
container_volume 26
creator Polley, Mei-Yin C
Schwartz, Daniel
Karrison, Theodore
Dignam, James J
description Abstract Background Randomized controlled trials have been the gold standard for evaluating medical treatments for many decades but they are often criticized for requiring large sample sizes. Given the urgent need for better therapies for glioblastoma, it has been argued that data collected from patients treated with the standard regimen can provide high-quality external control data to supplement or replace concurrent control arm in future glioblastoma trials. Methods In this article, we provide an in-depth appraisal of the use of external control data in the context of neuro-oncology trials. We describe several clinical trial designs with particular attention to how external information is utilized and address common fallacies that may lead to inappropriate adoptions of external control data. Results Using 2 completed glioblastoma trials, we illustrate the use of an assessment tool that lays out a blueprint for assembling a high-quality external control data set. Using statistical simulations, we draw caution from scenarios where these approaches can fall short on controlling the type I error rate. Conclusions While this approach may hold promise in generating informative data in certain settings, this sense of optimism should be tampered with a healthy dose of skepticism due to a myriad of design and analysis challenges articulated in this review. Importantly, careful planning is key to its successful implementation.
doi_str_mv 10.1093/neuonc/noae005
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2917860814</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><oup_id>10.1093/neuonc/noae005</oup_id><sourcerecordid>2917860814</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c329t-e63d4db0abacc092a6335d6564e4e52430f3cf5a0b97f1f56078e913e40aedec3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkD1PwzAQhi0EoqWwMiKPMKS149hJ2FDFl1QJBpgjx74EI9cudoLovyc0hZXBOkv33HunB6FzSuaUlGzhoPdOLZyXQAg_QFPKU5bwQojD3T9NCk7zCTqJ8Z2QlHJBj9GEFSnPaMGmqF3BJwTZGtdi-OogOGmx8q4L3mItO4mNw90bYA3RtA5Lp4cn7TaaiH2Dh_3BJ8MJ3vp2i7tgpI3X-BlksHFHbyAYG0_RUTN04GxfZ-j17vZl-ZCsnu4flzerRLG07BIQTGe6JrKWSpEylYIxrgUXGWTA04yRhqmGS1KXeUMbLkheQEkZZESCBsVm6HLM3QT_0UPsqrWJCqyVDnwfq7SkeSFIQbMBnY-oCj7GAE21CWYtw7aipPqRW41yq73cYeBin93Xa9B_-K_NAbgaAd9v_gv7BrKTh7c</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2917860814</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Leveraging external control data in the design and analysis of neuro-oncology trials: Pearls and perils</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current)</source><creator>Polley, Mei-Yin C ; Schwartz, Daniel ; Karrison, Theodore ; Dignam, James J</creator><creatorcontrib>Polley, Mei-Yin C ; Schwartz, Daniel ; Karrison, Theodore ; Dignam, James J</creatorcontrib><description>Abstract Background Randomized controlled trials have been the gold standard for evaluating medical treatments for many decades but they are often criticized for requiring large sample sizes. Given the urgent need for better therapies for glioblastoma, it has been argued that data collected from patients treated with the standard regimen can provide high-quality external control data to supplement or replace concurrent control arm in future glioblastoma trials. Methods In this article, we provide an in-depth appraisal of the use of external control data in the context of neuro-oncology trials. We describe several clinical trial designs with particular attention to how external information is utilized and address common fallacies that may lead to inappropriate adoptions of external control data. Results Using 2 completed glioblastoma trials, we illustrate the use of an assessment tool that lays out a blueprint for assembling a high-quality external control data set. Using statistical simulations, we draw caution from scenarios where these approaches can fall short on controlling the type I error rate. Conclusions While this approach may hold promise in generating informative data in certain settings, this sense of optimism should be tampered with a healthy dose of skepticism due to a myriad of design and analysis challenges articulated in this review. Importantly, careful planning is key to its successful implementation.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1522-8517</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1523-5866</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1523-5866</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1093/neuonc/noae005</identifier><identifier>PMID: 38254183</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>US: Oxford University Press</publisher><subject>Brain Neoplasms - therapy ; Clinical Trials as Topic - standards ; Glioblastoma - therapy ; Humans ; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic - methods ; Research Design - standards</subject><ispartof>Neuro-oncology (Charlottesville, Va.), 2024-05, Vol.26 (5), p.796-810</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Neuro-Oncology. All rights reserved. For commercial re-use, please contact reprints@oup.com for reprints and translation rights for reprints. All other permissions can be obtained through our RightsLink service via the Permissions link on the article page on our site—for further information please contact journals.permissions@oup.com. 2024</rights><rights>The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Neuro-Oncology. All rights reserved. For commercial re-use, please contact reprints@oup.com for reprints and translation rights for reprints. All other permissions can be obtained through our RightsLink service via the Permissions link on the article page on our site—for further information please contact journals.permissions@oup.com.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c329t-e63d4db0abacc092a6335d6564e4e52430f3cf5a0b97f1f56078e913e40aedec3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c329t-e63d4db0abacc092a6335d6564e4e52430f3cf5a0b97f1f56078e913e40aedec3</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-0106-0323</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,778,782,1581,27911,27912</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38254183$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Polley, Mei-Yin C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schwartz, Daniel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Karrison, Theodore</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dignam, James J</creatorcontrib><title>Leveraging external control data in the design and analysis of neuro-oncology trials: Pearls and perils</title><title>Neuro-oncology (Charlottesville, Va.)</title><addtitle>Neuro Oncol</addtitle><description>Abstract Background Randomized controlled trials have been the gold standard for evaluating medical treatments for many decades but they are often criticized for requiring large sample sizes. Given the urgent need for better therapies for glioblastoma, it has been argued that data collected from patients treated with the standard regimen can provide high-quality external control data to supplement or replace concurrent control arm in future glioblastoma trials. Methods In this article, we provide an in-depth appraisal of the use of external control data in the context of neuro-oncology trials. We describe several clinical trial designs with particular attention to how external information is utilized and address common fallacies that may lead to inappropriate adoptions of external control data. Results Using 2 completed glioblastoma trials, we illustrate the use of an assessment tool that lays out a blueprint for assembling a high-quality external control data set. Using statistical simulations, we draw caution from scenarios where these approaches can fall short on controlling the type I error rate. Conclusions While this approach may hold promise in generating informative data in certain settings, this sense of optimism should be tampered with a healthy dose of skepticism due to a myriad of design and analysis challenges articulated in this review. Importantly, careful planning is key to its successful implementation.</description><subject>Brain Neoplasms - therapy</subject><subject>Clinical Trials as Topic - standards</subject><subject>Glioblastoma - therapy</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic - methods</subject><subject>Research Design - standards</subject><issn>1522-8517</issn><issn>1523-5866</issn><issn>1523-5866</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkD1PwzAQhi0EoqWwMiKPMKS149hJ2FDFl1QJBpgjx74EI9cudoLovyc0hZXBOkv33HunB6FzSuaUlGzhoPdOLZyXQAg_QFPKU5bwQojD3T9NCk7zCTqJ8Z2QlHJBj9GEFSnPaMGmqF3BJwTZGtdi-OogOGmx8q4L3mItO4mNw90bYA3RtA5Lp4cn7TaaiH2Dh_3BJ8MJ3vp2i7tgpI3X-BlksHFHbyAYG0_RUTN04GxfZ-j17vZl-ZCsnu4flzerRLG07BIQTGe6JrKWSpEylYIxrgUXGWTA04yRhqmGS1KXeUMbLkheQEkZZESCBsVm6HLM3QT_0UPsqrWJCqyVDnwfq7SkeSFIQbMBnY-oCj7GAE21CWYtw7aipPqRW41yq73cYeBin93Xa9B_-K_NAbgaAd9v_gv7BrKTh7c</recordid><startdate>20240503</startdate><enddate>20240503</enddate><creator>Polley, Mei-Yin C</creator><creator>Schwartz, Daniel</creator><creator>Karrison, Theodore</creator><creator>Dignam, James J</creator><general>Oxford University Press</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0106-0323</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20240503</creationdate><title>Leveraging external control data in the design and analysis of neuro-oncology trials: Pearls and perils</title><author>Polley, Mei-Yin C ; Schwartz, Daniel ; Karrison, Theodore ; Dignam, James J</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c329t-e63d4db0abacc092a6335d6564e4e52430f3cf5a0b97f1f56078e913e40aedec3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>Brain Neoplasms - therapy</topic><topic>Clinical Trials as Topic - standards</topic><topic>Glioblastoma - therapy</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic - methods</topic><topic>Research Design - standards</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Polley, Mei-Yin C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schwartz, Daniel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Karrison, Theodore</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dignam, James J</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Neuro-oncology (Charlottesville, Va.)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Polley, Mei-Yin C</au><au>Schwartz, Daniel</au><au>Karrison, Theodore</au><au>Dignam, James J</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Leveraging external control data in the design and analysis of neuro-oncology trials: Pearls and perils</atitle><jtitle>Neuro-oncology (Charlottesville, Va.)</jtitle><addtitle>Neuro Oncol</addtitle><date>2024-05-03</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>26</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>796</spage><epage>810</epage><pages>796-810</pages><issn>1522-8517</issn><issn>1523-5866</issn><eissn>1523-5866</eissn><abstract>Abstract Background Randomized controlled trials have been the gold standard for evaluating medical treatments for many decades but they are often criticized for requiring large sample sizes. Given the urgent need for better therapies for glioblastoma, it has been argued that data collected from patients treated with the standard regimen can provide high-quality external control data to supplement or replace concurrent control arm in future glioblastoma trials. Methods In this article, we provide an in-depth appraisal of the use of external control data in the context of neuro-oncology trials. We describe several clinical trial designs with particular attention to how external information is utilized and address common fallacies that may lead to inappropriate adoptions of external control data. Results Using 2 completed glioblastoma trials, we illustrate the use of an assessment tool that lays out a blueprint for assembling a high-quality external control data set. Using statistical simulations, we draw caution from scenarios where these approaches can fall short on controlling the type I error rate. Conclusions While this approach may hold promise in generating informative data in certain settings, this sense of optimism should be tampered with a healthy dose of skepticism due to a myriad of design and analysis challenges articulated in this review. Importantly, careful planning is key to its successful implementation.</abstract><cop>US</cop><pub>Oxford University Press</pub><pmid>38254183</pmid><doi>10.1093/neuonc/noae005</doi><tpages>15</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0106-0323</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1522-8517
ispartof Neuro-oncology (Charlottesville, Va.), 2024-05, Vol.26 (5), p.796-810
issn 1522-8517
1523-5866
1523-5866
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2917860814
source MEDLINE; Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current)
subjects Brain Neoplasms - therapy
Clinical Trials as Topic - standards
Glioblastoma - therapy
Humans
Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic - methods
Research Design - standards
title Leveraging external control data in the design and analysis of neuro-oncology trials: Pearls and perils
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-15T15%3A02%3A51IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Leveraging%20external%20control%20data%20in%20the%20design%20and%20analysis%20of%20neuro-oncology%20trials:%20Pearls%20and%20perils&rft.jtitle=Neuro-oncology%20(Charlottesville,%20Va.)&rft.au=Polley,%20Mei-Yin%20C&rft.date=2024-05-03&rft.volume=26&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=796&rft.epage=810&rft.pages=796-810&rft.issn=1522-8517&rft.eissn=1523-5866&rft_id=info:doi/10.1093/neuonc/noae005&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2917860814%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2917860814&rft_id=info:pmid/38254183&rft_oup_id=10.1093/neuonc/noae005&rfr_iscdi=true