Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35925576›Full record

ArticleJAMA oncology2022

A New Approach to Simplifying and Harmonizing Cancer Clinical Trials-Standardizing Eligibility Criteria.

David E Gerber, Harpreet Singh, Erin Larkins, Andrea Ferris, Patrick M Forde, Wendy Selig, Upal Basu Roy

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. What Is Ailing Oncology Clinical Trials? Can We Fix Them?Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2024
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

7 authors.

David E GerberHarold C. Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas.
Harpreet SinghUSFood and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland.
Erin LarkinsUSFood and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland.
Andrea FerrisLUNGevity Foundation, Chicago, Illinois.
Patrick M FordeSidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland.
Wendy SeligWSCollaborative LLC, McLean, Virginia.
Upal Basu RoyLUNGevity Foundation, Chicago, Illinois.

Funding

UT Southwestern NCI National Clinical Trials Network (NCTN) LAPS - Supplemental Funds YR4UG1CA233302 · NCI · UT SOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL CENTER · PI David Eric Gerber · 2019 to 2026
$6.4M
UT Southwestern Center of Patient-Centered Outcomes Research (PCOR)R24HS022418 · AHRQ · UT SOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL CENTER · PI HALM, ETHAN A · 2013 to 2017
$5.0M
Development of New Cancer Treatments and InvestigatorsK24CA201543 · NCI · UT SOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL CENTER · PI GERBER, DAVID ERIC · 2016 to 2020
$737k
AHRQ HHS R24 HS022418NCI NIH HHS K24 CA201543NCI NIH HHS UG1 CA233302
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Clinical trial sponsors rely on eligibility criteria to control the characteristics of patients in their studies, promote the safety of participants, and optimize the interpretation of results. However, in recent years, complex and often overly restrictive inclusion and exclusion criteria have created substantial barriers to patient access to novel therapies, hindered trial recruitment and completion, and limited generalizability of trial results. A LUNGevity Foundation working group developed a framework for lung cancer clinical trial eligibility criteria. The goals of this framework are to (1) simplify eligibility criteria, (2) facilitate stakeholders' (patients, clinicians, and sponsors) search for appropriate trials, and (3) harmonize trial populations to support intertrial comparisons of treatment effects. Observations: Clinicians and representatives from the pharmaceutical industry, the National Cancer Institute, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the European Medicines Agency, and the LUNGevity Foundation undertook a process to identify and prioritize key items for inclusion in trial eligibility criteria. The group generated a prioritized library of terms to guide investigators and sponsors in the design of first-line, advanced non-small cell lung cancer clinical trials intended to support marketing application. These recommendations address disease stage and histologic features, enrollment biomarkers, performance status, organ function, brain metastases, and comorbidities. This effort forms the basis for a forthcoming FDA draft guidance for industry. Conclusions and Relevance: As an initial step, the recommended cross-trial standardization of eligibility criteria may harmonize trial populations. Going forward, by connecting diverse stakeholders and providing formal opportunity for public input, the emerging FDA draft guidance may also provide an opportunity to revise and simplify long-standing approaches to trial eligibility. This work serves as a prototype for similar efforts now underway for other cancers.

Indexed as

Clinical Trials as TopicNeoplasmsBrain NeoplasmsCarcinoma, Non-Small-Cell LungEligibility DeterminationHumansLung NeoplasmsUnited StatesUnited States Food and Drug Administration

Identifiers

PMID35925576
PMCPMC9934063

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.