PURPOSE: Although the incorporation of research biopsies into clinical trials is increasing, limited information is available about how study protocols and informed consents integrate and describe their use. METHODS: All therapeutic clinical trials in which image-guided research biopsies were performed from January 1, 2005, to October 1, 2010, were identified from an interventional radiology database. Data from study protocols and informed consents were extracted and analyzed. Procedural complications were recorded. RESULTS: A total of 57 clinical trials were identified, of which 38 (67%) contained at least one mandatory biopsy. The analysis of the research biopsy tumor tissue was a study end point in 95% of trials. The primary indication for a research biopsy was for integral biomarker analysis in 32% and for correlative science in 68% of trials. A statistical analytic plan for the correlative science research biopsy tumor tissue was mentioned in 26%, described as exploratory in 51%, and not mentioned in 23% of trials. For studies with mandatory biopsies, biopsy was an eligibility criterion in 71% of trials, and a statistical justification for the research biopsy sample size was present in 50% of trials. A total of 745 research biopsies were performed on 576 patients. Overall and major complication rates were 5.2% (39 of 745 biopsies) and 0.8% (six of 745 biopsies), respectively. Complication rates for intrathoracic and abdominal/pelvic solid organ biopsies were 17.1% (36 of 211 biopsies) and 1.6% (three of 189 biopsies), respectively. Site-stratified research biopsy-related risks were discussed in five consents. CONCLUSION: A better representation of the risks and benefits of research biopsies in study protocols and informed consents is needed.
PURPOSE: Although the incorporation of research biopsies into clinical trials is increasing, limited information is available about how study protocols and informed consents integrate and describe their use. METHODS: All therapeutic clinical trials in which image-guided research biopsies were performed from January 1, 2005, to October 1, 2010, were identified from an interventional radiology database. Data from study protocols and informed consents were extracted and analyzed. Procedural complications were recorded. RESULTS: A total of 57 clinical trials were identified, of which 38 (67%) contained at least one mandatory biopsy. The analysis of the research biopsy tumor tissue was a study end point in 95% of trials. The primary indication for a research biopsy was for integral biomarker analysis in 32% and for correlative science in 68% of trials. A statistical analytic plan for the correlative science research biopsy tumor tissue was mentioned in 26%, described as exploratory in 51%, and not mentioned in 23% of trials. For studies with mandatory biopsies, biopsy was an eligibility criterion in 71% of trials, and a statistical justification for the research biopsy sample size was present in 50% of trials. A total of 745 research biopsies were performed on 576 patients. Overall and major complication rates were 5.2% (39 of 745 biopsies) and 0.8% (six of 745 biopsies), respectively. Complication rates for intrathoracic and abdominal/pelvic solid organ biopsies were 17.1% (36 of 211 biopsies) and 1.6% (three of 189 biopsies), respectively. Site-stratified research biopsy-related risks were discussed in five consents. CONCLUSION: A better representation of the risks and benefits of research biopsies in study protocols and informed consents is needed.
Authors: Bernardo H L Goulart; Jeffrey W Clark; Homer H Pien; Thomas G Roberts; Stan N Finkelstein; Bruce A Chabner Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2007-11-15 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Janet E Dancey; Kevin K Dobbin; Susan Groshen; J Milburn Jessup; Andrew H Hruszkewycz; Maria Koehler; Ralph Parchment; Mark J Ratain; Lalitha K Shankar; Walter M Stadler; Lawrence D True; Amy Gravell; Michael R Grever Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2010-03-09 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: A Dowlati; J Haaga; S C Remick; T P Spiro; S L Gerson; L Liu; S J Berger; N A Berger; J K Willson Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2001-10 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Jeffrey Peppercorn; Iuliana Shapira; Deborah Collyar; Teresa Deshields; Nancy Lin; Ian Krop; Hans Grunwald; Paula Friedman; Ann H Partridge; Richard L Schilsky; Monica M Bertagnolli Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2010-04-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Anne M Covey; Ripal Gandhi; Lynn A Brody; George Getrajdman; Howard T Thaler; Karen T Brown Journal: J Vasc Interv Radiol Date: 2004-05 Impact factor: 3.464
Authors: Alda L Tam; Howard J Lim; Ignacio I Wistuba; Anobel Tamrazi; Michael D Kuo; Etay Ziv; Stephen Wong; Albert J Shih; Robert J Webster; Gregory S Fischer; Sunitha Nagrath; Suzanne E Davis; Sarah B White; Kamran Ahrar Journal: J Vasc Interv Radiol Date: 2015-11-25 Impact factor: 3.464
Authors: Donald J Johann; Mathew Steliga; Ik J Shin; Donghoon Yoon; Konstantinos Arnaoutakis; Laura Hutchins; Meeiyueh Liu; Jason Liem; Karl Walker; Andy Pereira; Mary Yang; Susanne K Jeffus; Erich Peterson; Joshua Xu Journal: Exp Biol Med (Maywood) Date: 2018-02
Authors: Oliver Jonas; Heather M Landry; Jason E Fuller; John T Santini; Jose Baselga; Robert I Tepper; Michael J Cima; Robert Langer Journal: Sci Transl Med Date: 2015-04-22 Impact factor: 17.956
Authors: Ellen R Gritz; Kathryn B Arnold; Carol M Moinpour; Allison M Burton-Chase; Catherine M Tangen; Jeffrey F Probstfield; William A See; Michael M Lieber; Vincent Caggiano; Sarah Moody-Thomas; Connie Szczepanek; Anne Ryan; Susie Carlin; Shannon Hill; Phyllis J Goodman; Rose Mary Padberg; Lori M Minasian; Frank L Meyskens; Ian M Thompson Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2014-07-15 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Stepan M Esagian; Georgia Ι Grigoriadou; Ilias P Nikas; Vasileios Boikou; Peter M Sadow; Jae-Kyung Won; Konstantinos P Economopoulos Journal: J Cancer Res Clin Oncol Date: 2020-05-27 Impact factor: 4.553
Authors: Katherine V Ferry-Galow; Vivekananda Datta; Hala R Makhlouf; John Wright; Bradford J Wood; Elliot Levy; Etta D Pisano; Alda L Tam; Susanna I Lee; Umar Mahmood; Lawrence V Rubinstein; James H Doroshow; Alice P Chen Journal: J Oncol Pract Date: 2018-10-04 Impact factor: 3.840