Lois H Browne1, Peter H Graham2. 1. Clinical Trials Unit, Cancer Care Centre, St George Hospital, Kogarah, NSW, Australia lois.browne@sesiahs.health.nsw.gov.au. 2. Clinical Trials Unit, Cancer Care Centre, St George Hospital, Kogarah, NSW, Australia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: It is assumed investigators and statisticians fully understand the importance of avoiding missing outcomes and the intention-to-treat principle during design and analysis phases of a randomised controlled trial in order to obtain the most valuable and reliable results. However, many personnel undertaking day-to-day trial conduct and data collection commonly rely exclusively for guidance on the widely implemented, indeed regulated, International Conference on Harmonisation-Good Clinical Practice document as the guideline and standard for trial conduct. PURPOSE: This article describes adverse consequences of omission of intention-to-treat principles from training for trial personnel and explores the need for training in addition to the International Conference on Harmonisation-Good Clinical Practice guideline document. METHODS: Data from the Breast Boost Study were used to illustrate a comparison of actual results, where vigilant senior investigators re-enforced intention-to-treat requirements throughout all aspects of trial conduct with results that could easily have occurred if study personnel did not understand the importance of intention-to-treat principles. Experience as a co-ordinating centre for an international trial (Trans-Tasman Radiation Oncology Group 08.06 Breast STARS) acted as an audit of data-management culture regarding intention-to-treat in Australia and New Zealand. RESULTS: Despite the Breast Boost Study exceeding planned accrual, it was demonstrated that the study, which found a statistically significant result, could have reported a negative or inconclusive result under the scenario of trial conduct personnel having lack of understanding of the importance of avoiding losses to follow-up. Trans-Tasman Radiation Oncology 08.06 co-ordination experience verified that data-management culture in Australia and New Zealand does not adequately recognise intention-to-treat principles, and this is reflected in trial conduct. LIMITATIONS: Trial data described are limited to two trials and in the Australian and New Zealand setting. CONCLUSION: To be both scientifically and ethically valid, guidelines for trial conduct should include and stress the importance of the intention-to-treat principle and in particular avoiding missing outcomes. Our discussion highlights the vitally important role played by personnel involved in day-to-day trial conduct. Inclusion of scientific principles in guideline documents and/or training which goes beyond International Conference on Harmonisation-Good Clinical Practice to include intention-to-treat is essential to achieve robust research results. Related aspects of randomised trial consent and ethics are discussed.
BACKGROUND: It is assumed investigators and statisticians fully understand the importance of avoiding missing outcomes and the intention-to-treat principle during design and analysis phases of a randomised controlled trial in order to obtain the most valuable and reliable results. However, many personnel undertaking day-to-day trial conduct and data collection commonly rely exclusively for guidance on the widely implemented, indeed regulated, International Conference on Harmonisation-Good Clinical Practice document as the guideline and standard for trial conduct. PURPOSE: This article describes adverse consequences of omission of intention-to-treat principles from training for trial personnel and explores the need for training in addition to the International Conference on Harmonisation-Good Clinical Practice guideline document. METHODS: Data from the Breast Boost Study were used to illustrate a comparison of actual results, where vigilant senior investigators re-enforced intention-to-treat requirements throughout all aspects of trial conduct with results that could easily have occurred if study personnel did not understand the importance of intention-to-treat principles. Experience as a co-ordinating centre for an international trial (Trans-Tasman Radiation Oncology Group 08.06 Breast STARS) acted as an audit of data-management culture regarding intention-to-treat in Australia and New Zealand. RESULTS: Despite the Breast Boost Study exceeding planned accrual, it was demonstrated that the study, which found a statistically significant result, could have reported a negative or inconclusive result under the scenario of trial conduct personnel having lack of understanding of the importance of avoiding losses to follow-up. Trans-Tasman Radiation Oncology 08.06 co-ordination experience verified that data-management culture in Australia and New Zealand does not adequately recognise intention-to-treat principles, and this is reflected in trial conduct. LIMITATIONS: Trial data described are limited to two trials and in the Australian and New Zealand setting. CONCLUSION: To be both scientifically and ethically valid, guidelines for trial conduct should include and stress the importance of the intention-to-treat principle and in particular avoiding missing outcomes. Our discussion highlights the vitally important role played by personnel involved in day-to-day trial conduct. Inclusion of scientific principles in guideline documents and/or training which goes beyond International Conference on Harmonisation-Good Clinical Practice to include intention-to-treat is essential to achieve robust research results. Related aspects of randomised trial consent and ethics are discussed.
Authors: Jessica T Mozersky; Alison L Antes; Kari Baldwin; Michelle Jenkerson; James M DuBois Journal: Clin Trials Date: 2020-01-27 Impact factor: 2.486
Authors: Martin J Landray; Jeroen J Bax; Laurence Alliot; Marc Buyse; Adam Cohen; Rory Collins; Gerhard Hindricks; Stefan K James; Sile Lane; Aldo P Maggioni; Ann Meeker-O'Connell; Gunnar Olsson; Stuart J Pocock; Michael Rawlins; Jonathan Sellors; Kaori Shinagawa; Karin R Sipido; Liam Smeeth; Richard Stephens; Murray W Stewart; Wendy Gattis Stough; Fergus Sweeney; Frans Van de Werf; Kerrie Woods; Barbara Casadei Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2017-06-01 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Carolynn T Jones; Penelope Jester; Jennifer A Croker; Jessica Fritter; Cathy Roche; Brian Wallace; Andrew O Westfall; David T Redden; James Willig Journal: J Clin Transl Sci Date: 2019-10-29