Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34210348›Full record

ArticleBMC rheumatology2021

Innovative trial approaches in immune-mediated inflammatory diseases: current use and future potential.

Michael J Grayling, Theophile Bigirumurame, Svetlana Cherlin, Luke Ouma, Haiyan Zheng, James M S Wason

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC rheumatology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Augmented binary method for basket trials (ABBA).Statistical methods in medical research · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Bayesian modelling strategies for borrowing of information in randomised basket trials.Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series C, Applied statistics · 2022
    Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Michael J GraylingPopulation Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Baddiley-Clark Building, Richardson Road, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4AX, UK.
Theophile BigirumuramePopulation Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Baddiley-Clark Building, Richardson Road, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4AX, UK.
Svetlana CherlinPopulation Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Baddiley-Clark Building, Richardson Road, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4AX, UK.
Luke OumaPopulation Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Baddiley-Clark Building, Richardson Road, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4AX, UK.
Haiyan ZhengPopulation Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Baddiley-Clark Building, Richardson Road, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4AX, UK.
James M S WasonPopulation Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Baddiley-Clark Building, Richardson Road, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4AX, UK. james.wason@newcastle.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4691-126X

Funding

Cancer Research UK 18113Medical Research Council MC_UP_1302/4Medical Research Council MC_UU_00002/14Medical Research Council MC_UU_00002/6Medical Research Council MR/N028171/1Medical Research Council MR/S014357/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite progress that has been made in the treatment of many immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs), there remains a need for improved treatments. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) provide the highest form of evidence on the effectiveness of a potential new treatment regimen, but they are extremely expensive and time consuming to conduct. Consequently, much focus has been given in recent years to innovative design and analysis methods that could improve the efficiency of RCTs. In this article, we review the current use and future potential of these methods within the context of IMID trials.

methodsWe provide a review of several innovative methods that would provide utility in IMID research. These include novel study designs (adaptive trials, Sequential Multi-Assignment Randomised Trials, basket, and umbrella trials) and data analysis methodologies (augmented analyses of composite responder endpoints, using high-dimensional biomarker information to stratify patients, and emulation of RCTs from routinely collected data). IMID trials are now well-placed to embrace innovative methods. For example, well-developed statistical frameworks for adaptive trial design are ready for implementation, whilst the growing availability of historical datasets makes the use of Bayesian methods particularly applicable. To assess whether and how these innovative methods have been used in practice, we conducted a review via PubMed of clinical trials pertaining to any of 51 IMIDs that were published between 2018 and 20 in five high impact factor clinical journals.

resultsAmongst 97 articles included in the review, 19 (19.6%) used an innovative design method, but most of these were relatively straightforward examples of innovative approaches. Only two (2.1%) reported the use of evidence from routinely collected data, cohorts, or biobanks. Eight (9.2%) collected high-dimensional data.

conclusionsApplication of innovative statistical methodology to IMID trials has the potential to greatly improve efficiency, to generalise and extrapolate trial results, and to further personalise treatment strategies. Currently, such methods are infrequently utilised in practice. New research is required to ensure that IMID trials can benefit from the most suitable methods.

Indexed as

Adaptive designBasket designBayesian designComposite endpointHigh-dimensional dataRoutinely collected dataSMART trialUmbrella design

Identifiers

PMID34210348
PMCPMC8252241

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.