Literature DB >> 26071866

Comparison of Characteristics and Outcomes of Trial Participants and Nonparticipants: Example of Blood and Marrow Transplant Clinical Trials Network 0201 Trial.

Nandita Khera1, Navneet S Majhail2, Ruta Brazauskas3, Zhiwei Wang4, Naya He4, Mahmoud D Aljurf5, Görgün Akpek6, Yoshiko Atsuta7, Sara Beattie8, Christopher N Bredeson9, Linda J Burns10, Jignesh D Dalal11, César O Freytes12, Vikas Gupta13, Yoshihiro Inamoto14, Hillard M Lazarus15, Charles F LeMaistre16, Amir Steinberg17, David Szwajcer18, John R Wingard19, Baldeep Wirk20, William A Wood21, Steven Joffe22, Theresa E Hahn23, Fausto R Loberiza24, Claudio Anasetti25, Mary M Horowitz4, Stephanie J Lee26.   

Abstract

Controversy surrounds the question of whether clinical trial participants have better outcomes than comparable patients who are not treated on a trial. We explored this question using a recent large, randomized, multicenter study comparing peripheral blood (PB) with bone marrow transplantation from unrelated donors, conducted by the Blood and Marrow Transplant Clinical Trials Network (BMT CTN). We compared characteristics and outcomes of study participants (n = 494) and nonparticipants (n = 1384) who appeared eligible and received similar treatment without enrolling on the BMT CTN trial at participating centers during the study time period. Data were obtained from the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research. Outcomes were compared between the 2 groups using Cox proportional hazards regression models. No significant differences in age, sex, disease distribution, race/ethnicity, HLA matching, comorbidities, and interval from diagnosis to hematopoietic cell transplantation were seen between the participants and nonparticipants. Nonparticipants were more likely to have lower performance status, lower risk disease, and older donors, and to receive myeloablative conditioning and antithymocyte globulin. Nonparticipants were also more likely to receive PB grafts, the intervention tested in the trial (66% versus 50%, P < .001). Overall survival, transplantation-related mortality, and incidences of acute or chronic graft-versus-host disease were comparable between the 2 groups though relapse was higher (hazard ratio, 1.22; 95% confidence interval, 1.02 to 1.46; P = .028) in nonparticipants. Despite differences in certain baseline characteristics, survival was comparable between study participants and nonparticipants. The results of the BMT CTN trial appear generalizable to the population of trial-eligible patients.
Copyright © 2015 American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Hematopoietic cell transplantation; Trial participation

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26071866      PMCID: PMC4568172          DOI: 10.1016/j.bbmt.2015.06.004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biol Blood Marrow Transplant        ISSN: 1083-8791            Impact factor:   5.742


  24 in total

Review 1.  The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomized trials.

Authors:  D Moher; K F Schulz; D G Altman
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2001-04-17       Impact factor: 25.391

2.  Clinical trial participation after myocardial infarction in a national cardiovascular data registry.

Authors:  Jacob A Udell; Tracy Y Wang; Shuang Li; Payal Kohli; Matthew T Roe; James A de Lemos; Stephen D Wiviott
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2014-08-27       Impact factor: 56.272

3.  How sociodemographics, presence of oncology specialists, and hospital cancer programs affect accrual to cancer treatment trials.

Authors:  Warren B Sateren; Edward L Trimble; Jeffrey Abrams; Otis Brawley; Nancy Breen; Leslie Ford; Mary McCabe; Richard Kaplan; Malcolm Smith; Richard Ungerleider; Michaele C Christian
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2002-04-15       Impact factor: 44.544

4.  Selection of patients may limit the generalizability of results from cancer trials.

Authors:  Sophie D Fosså; Eva Skovlund
Journal:  Acta Oncol       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 4.089

Review 5.  Comparison of outcomes in cancer patients treated within and outside clinical trials: conceptual framework and structured review.

Authors:  Jeffrey M Peppercorn; Jane C Weeks; E Francis Cook; Steven Joffe
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2004-01-24       Impact factor: 79.321

6.  Direct comparison of characteristics, treatment, and outcomes of patients enrolled versus patients not enrolled in a clinical trial at centers participating in the TIMI 9 Trial and TIMI 9 Registry.

Authors:  Maria Cecilia Bahit; Christopher P Cannon; Elliott M Antman; Sabina A Murphy; C Michael Gibson; Carolyn H McCabe; Eugene Braunwald
Journal:  Am Heart J       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 4.749

7.  Participation in cancer clinical trials: race-, sex-, and age-based disparities.

Authors:  Vivek H Murthy; Harlan M Krumholz; Cary P Gross
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2004-06-09       Impact factor: 56.272

8.  Matched and mismatched allogeneic stem-cell transplantation from unrelated donors using combined graft-versus-host disease prophylaxis including rabbit anti-T lymphocyte globulin.

Authors:  Jürgen Finke; Claudia Schmoor; Helmut Lang; Karin Potthoff; Hartmut Bertz
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2003-02-01       Impact factor: 44.544

9.  Assessment of differences in patient populations selected for excluded from participation in clinical phase III acute myelogenous leukemia trials.

Authors:  Catherine Mengis; Stefan Aebi; Andreas Tobler; Werner Dähler; Martin F Fey
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2003-11-01       Impact factor: 44.544

10.  External validity of a trial comprised of elderly patients with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer.

Authors:  Willemien van de Water; Mandy Kiderlen; Esther Bastiaannet; Sabine Siesling; Rudi G J Westendorp; Cornelis J H van de Velde; Johan W R Nortier; Caroline Seynaeve; Anton J M de Craen; Gerrit-Jan Liefers
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2014-03-19       Impact factor: 13.506

View more
  4 in total

Review 1.  The Blood and Marrow Transplant Clinical Trials Network: An Effective Infrastructure for Addressing Important Issues in Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation.

Authors: 
Journal:  Biol Blood Marrow Transplant       Date:  2016-07-11       Impact factor: 5.742

2.  Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation for Adult Chronic Myelomonocytic Leukemia.

Authors:  Hien Duong Liu; Kwang Woo Ahn; Zhen-Huan Hu; Mehdi Hamadani; Taiga Nishihori; Baldeep Wirk; Amer Beitinjaneh; David Rizzieri; Michael R Grunwald; Mitchell Sabloff; Richard F Olsson; Ashish Bajel; Christopher Bredeson; Andrew Daly; Yoshihiro Inamoto; Navneet Majhail; Ayman Saad; Vikas Gupta; Aaron Gerds; Adriana Malone; Martin Tallman; Ran Reshef; David I Marks; Edward Copelan; Usama Gergis; Mary Lynn Savoie; Celalettin Ustun; Mark R Litzow; Jean-Yves Cahn; Tamila Kindwall-Keller; Gorgun Akpek; Bipin N Savani; Mahmoud Aljurf; Jacob M Rowe; Peter H Wiernik; Jack W Hsu; Jorge Cortes; Matt Kalaycio; Richard Maziarz; Ronald Sobecks; Uday Popat; Edwin Alyea; Wael Saber
Journal:  Biol Blood Marrow Transplant       Date:  2017-01-20       Impact factor: 5.742

3.  Translation of Clinical Research into Practice: An Impact Assessment of the Results from the Blood and Marrow Transplant Clinical Trials Network Protocol 0201 on Unrelated Graft Source Utilization.

Authors:  Nandita Khera; Lih-Wen Mau; Ellen M Denzen; Christa Meyer; Kate Houg; Stephanie J Lee; Mary M Horowitz; Linda J Burns
Journal:  Biol Blood Marrow Transplant       Date:  2018-06-30       Impact factor: 5.742

4.  Are cancer patients better off if they participate in clinical trials? A mixed methods study.

Authors:  Zandra Engelbak Nielsen; Stefan Eriksson; Laurine Bente Schram Harsløf; Suzanne Petri; Gert Helgesson; Margrete Mangset; Tove E Godskesen
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2020-05-08       Impact factor: 4.430

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.