Literature DB >> 24365533

The misguided ethics of crossover trials.

Vinay Prasad1, Christine Grady2.   

Abstract

Crossover is increasingly favored in trials of cancer therapies; even those that seek to establish the basic efficacy of novel drugs. Crossover is done in part for trial recruitment, but also out of a sense of doing the right thing-offering the investigational agent to more patients. In this paper, we argue that this ethical inclination-that crossover is a preferred trial choice-is misguided. In seeking to sate the desires of participants, we might undermine a trial's ability to answer a meaningful clinical question. When a trial is incapable of answering a question, it becomes unethical. Using a crossover strategy in oncology clinical trials can make trials less ethical, not more. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Crossover; Ethics of clinical trials; Trial validity

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24365533      PMCID: PMC3981898          DOI: 10.1016/j.cct.2013.12.003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials        ISSN: 1551-7144            Impact factor:   2.226


  12 in total

1.  Why do phase III clinical trials in oncology fail so often?

Authors:  Laleh Amiri-Kordestani; Tito Fojo
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2012-04-06       Impact factor: 13.506

2.  Epidemiology and reporting of randomised trials published in PubMed journals.

Authors:  An-Wen Chan; Douglas G Altman
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2005 Mar 26-Apr 1       Impact factor: 79.321

3.  Correcting overall survival for the impact of crossover via a rank-preserving structural failure time (RPSFT) model in the RECORD-1 trial of everolimus in metastatic renal-cell carcinoma.

Authors:  P Korhonen; E Zuber; M Branson; N Hollaender; N Yateman; T Katiskalahti; D Lebwohl; T Haas
Journal:  J Biopharm Stat       Date:  2012       Impact factor: 1.051

4.  Making sense of clinical trial data: is inverse probability of censoring weighted analysis the answer to crossover bias?

Authors:  Mothaffar Rimawi; Susan G Hilsenbeck
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2012-01-03       Impact factor: 44.544

5.  Combined BRAF and MEK inhibition in melanoma with BRAF V600 mutations.

Authors:  Keith T Flaherty; Jeffery R Infante; Adil Daud; Rene Gonzalez; Richard F Kefford; Jeffrey Sosman; Omid Hamid; Lynn Schuchter; Jonathan Cebon; Nageatte Ibrahim; Ragini Kudchadkar; Howard A Burris; Gerald Falchook; Alain Algazi; Karl Lewis; Georgina V Long; Igor Puzanov; Peter Lebowitz; Ajay Singh; Shonda Little; Peng Sun; Alicia Allred; Daniele Ouellet; Kevin B Kim; Kiran Patel; Jeffrey Weber
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2012-09-29       Impact factor: 91.245

6.  Effect of duloxetine on pain, function, and quality of life among patients with chemotherapy-induced painful peripheral neuropathy: a randomized clinical trial.

Authors:  Ellen M Lavoie Smith; Herbert Pang; Constance Cirrincione; Stewart Fleishman; Electra D Paskett; Tim Ahles; Linda R Bressler; Camilo E Fadul; Chetaye Knox; Nguyet Le-Lindqwister; Paul B Gilman; Charles L Shapiro
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2013-04-03       Impact factor: 56.272

7.  Lenalidomide plus dexamethasone for high-risk smoldering multiple myeloma.

Authors:  María-Victoria Mateos; Miguel-Teodoro Hernández; Pilar Giraldo; Javier de la Rubia; Felipe de Arriba; Lucía López Corral; Laura Rosiñol; Bruno Paiva; Luis Palomera; Joan Bargay; Albert Oriol; Felipe Prosper; Javier López; Eduardo Olavarría; Nuria Quintana; José-Luis García; Joan Bladé; Juan-José Lahuerta; Jesús-F San Miguel
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2013-08-01       Impact factor: 91.245

8.  Treatment success in cancer: new cancer treatment successes identified in phase 3 randomized controlled trials conducted by the National Cancer Institute-sponsored cooperative oncology groups, 1955 to 2006.

Authors:  Benjamin Djulbegovic; Ambuj Kumar; Heloisa P Soares; Iztok Hozo; Gerold Bepler; Mike Clarke; Charles L Bennett
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  2008-03-24

9.  Efficacy of everolimus in advanced renal cell carcinoma: a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled phase III trial.

Authors:  Robert J Motzer; Bernard Escudier; Stéphane Oudard; Thomas E Hutson; Camillo Porta; Sergio Bracarda; Viktor Grünwald; John A Thompson; Robert A Figlin; Norbert Hollaender; Gladys Urbanowitz; William J Berg; Andrea Kay; David Lebwohl; Alain Ravaud
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2008-07-22       Impact factor: 79.321

Review 10.  The stepped wedge trial design: a systematic review.

Authors:  Celia A Brown; Richard J Lilford
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2006-11-08       Impact factor: 4.615

View more
  6 in total

1.  Adding the 'medicines' back into personalized medicine to improve cancer treatment outcomes.

Authors:  Jennifer H Martin; Elizabeth Phillips; David Thomas; Andrew A Somogyi
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2015-11       Impact factor: 4.335

2.  Hard-Wired Bias: How Even Double-Blind, Randomized Controlled Trials Can Be Skewed From the Start.

Authors:  Vinay Prasad; Vance W Berger
Journal:  Mayo Clin Proc       Date:  2015-08-12       Impact factor: 7.616

Review 3.  Standard of care in immunotherapy trials: Challenges and considerations.

Authors:  Gareth Rivalland; Andrew M Scott; Thomas John
Journal:  Hum Vaccin Immunother       Date:  2017-03-01       Impact factor: 3.452

4.  Strength of Validation for Surrogate End Points Used in the US Food and Drug Administration's Approval of Oncology Drugs.

Authors:  Chul Kim; Vinay Prasad
Journal:  Mayo Clin Proc       Date:  2016-05-10       Impact factor: 7.616

5.  Trends in the crossover of patients in phase III oncology clinical trials in the USA.

Authors:  Justin Yeh; Shruti Gupta; Sunny J Patel; Vamsi Kota; Achuta K Guddati
Journal:  Ecancermedicalscience       Date:  2020-11-13

6.  When is crossover desirable in cancer drug trials and when is it problematic?

Authors:  A Haslam; V Prasad
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  2018-05-01       Impact factor: 51.769

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.