Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26714555›Full record

ArticleJournal of the National Cancer Institute2016

Predicting Low Accrual in the National Cancer Institute's Cooperative Group Clinical Trials.

Caroline S Bennette, Scott D Ramsey, Cara L McDermott, Josh J Carlson, Anirban Basu, David L Veenstra

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 66 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
66citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

66 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Evaluating the impact of delayed study startup on accrual in cancer studies.Contemporary clinical trials communications · 2025
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

6 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Caroline S BennettePharmaceutical Outcomes Research and Policy Program, University of Washington, Seattle, WA (CSB, SDR, CLM, JJC, AB, DLV) and the Hutchinson Institute for Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center (SDR).
Scott D RamseyPharmaceutical Outcomes Research and Policy Program, University of Washington, Seattle, WA (CSB, SDR, CLM, JJC, AB, DLV) and the Hutchinson Institute for Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center (SDR).
Cara L McDermottPharmaceutical Outcomes Research and Policy Program, University of Washington, Seattle, WA (CSB, SDR, CLM, JJC, AB, DLV) and the Hutchinson Institute for Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center (SDR).
Josh J CarlsonPharmaceutical Outcomes Research and Policy Program, University of Washington, Seattle, WA (CSB, SDR, CLM, JJC, AB, DLV) and the Hutchinson Institute for Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center (SDR).
Anirban BasuPharmaceutical Outcomes Research and Policy Program, University of Washington, Seattle, WA (CSB, SDR, CLM, JJC, AB, DLV) and the Hutchinson Institute for Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center (SDR).
David L VeenstraPharmaceutical Outcomes Research and Policy Program, University of Washington, Seattle, WA (CSB, SDR, CLM, JJC, AB, DLV) and the Hutchinson Institute for Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center (SDR).

Funding

SWOG NCORP Research BaseUG1CA189974 · NCI · THE HOPE FOUNDATION · PI CHARLES D. BLANKE, DAWN HERSHMAN · 2014 to 2026
$80.6M
Prioritizing research: evaluation of a portfolio management approach in clinicalR36HS023340 · AHRQ · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI BENNETTE, CAROLINE SAVAGE · 2014 to 2014
$38k
AHRQ HHS 1R36HS023340-01NCI NIH HHS UG1 CA189974
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe extent to which trial-level factors differentially influence accrual to trials has not been comprehensively studied. Our objective was to evaluate the empirical relationship and predictive properties of putative risk factors for low accrual in the National Cancer Institute's (NCI's) Cooperative Group Program, now the National Clinical Trials Network (NCTN).

methodsData from 787 phase II/III adult NCTN-sponsored trials launched between 2000 and 2011 were used to develop a logistic regression model to predict low accrual, defined as trials that closed with or were accruing at less than 50% of target; 46 trials opened between 2012 and 2013 were used for prospective validation. Candidate predictors were identified from a literature review and expert interviews; final predictors were selected using stepwise regression. Model performance was evaluated by calibration and discrimination via the area under the curve (AUC). All statistical tests were two-sided.

resultsEighteen percent (n = 145) of NCTN-sponsored trials closed with low accrual or were accruing at less than 50% of target three years or more after initiation. A multivariable model of twelve trial-level risk factors had good calibration and discrimination for predicting trials with low accrual (AUC in trials launched 2000-2011 = 0.739, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.696 to 0.783]; 2012-2013: AUC = 0.732, 95% CI = 0.547 to 0.917). Results were robust to different definitions of low accrual and predictor selection strategies.

conclusionsWe identified multiple characteristics of NCTN-sponsored trials associated with low accrual, several of which have not been previously empirically described, and developed a prediction model that can provide a useful estimate of accrual risk based on these factors. Future work should assess the role of such prediction tools in trial design and prioritization decisions.

Indexed as

Clinical Trials, Phase II as TopicClinical Trials, Phase III as TopicMulticenter Studies as TopicPatient SelectionResearch DesignHumansLogistic ModelsNational Cancer Institute (U.S.)Reproducibility of ResultsResearch Support as TopicRisk FactorsUnited States

Identifiers

PMID26714555
PMCPMC5964887

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.