ArticleStatistical methods in medical research2016
Simulating the contribution of a biospecimen and clinical data repository in a phase II clinical trial: A value of information analysis.
Article in Statistical methods in medical research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Academic medical centers as innovation ecosystems to address population -omics challenges in precision medicine.Journal of translational medicine · 2018Review
- Use of the Total Cancer Care System to Enrich Screening for CD30-Positive Solid Tumors for Patient Enrollment Into a Brentuximab Vedotin Clinical Trial: A Pilot Study to Evaluate Feasibility.JMIR research protocols · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The potential contributions of a centralized data warehouse or repository in clinical research include the expedited accrual of subjects for phase II trials. Understanding the contribution of data warehouses that integrate clinical, biospecimen, and molecular data for the conduct of clinical trials is essential to inform private and public decisions on resource allocation and investment. We conducted a value of information analysis using data from recent trials at the Moffitt Cancer Center and simulated the potential reductions in trial size due to possible alternative scenarios of expedited accrual. In this study, we compared alternative data sets using a single model to assess value of information. Our findings suggest that the reductions in trial size range from 0% to 43%, depending on the amount of censoring in overall survival. The ability to expedite the accrual of patients for clinical trial studies using large data repositories that store data on inclusion/exclusion criteria and response to standard of care therapies demonstrated significant improvement in reducing the number of subjects needed to achieve similar end-results, as evaluated using value of information analysis with a limited number of parameters and a parsimonious model of overall survival.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.