Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37179306›Full record

ArticleBMC medical research methodology2023

The Trial within Cohorts (TwiCs) study design in oncology: experience and methodological reflections.

Rob Kessels, Anne M May, Miriam Koopman, Kit C B Roes

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
10.8field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Precision cancer medicine 2025: some concerns.Acta oncologica (Stockholm, Sweden) · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Rob KesselsDutch Oncology Research Platform, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Anne M MayJulius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht University, STR 6.131 , P.O. Box 85500, 3508 GA, Utrecht, the Netherlands. A.M.May@umcutrecht.nl.
Miriam KoopmanDepartment of Medical Oncology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Kit C B RoesDepartment of Health Evidence, Radboud University Medical Center, Section Biostatistics, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Utrecht University · NLDutch Cancer Society · NLRadboud University Nijmegen · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A Trial within Cohorts (TwiCs) study design is a trial design that uses the infrastructure of an observational cohort study to initiate a randomized trial. Upon cohort enrollment, the participants provide consent for being randomized in future studies without being informed. Once a new treatment is available, eligible cohort participants are randomly assigned to the treatment or standard of care. Patients randomized to the treatment arm are offered the new treatment, which they can choose to refuse. Patients who refuse will receive standard of care instead. Patients randomized to the standard of care arm receive no information about the trial and continue receiving standard of care as part of the cohort study. Standard cohort measures are used for outcome comparisons. The TwiCs study design aims to overcome some issues encountered in standard Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs). An example of an issue in standard RCTs is the slow patient accrual. A TwiCs study aims to improve this by selecting patients using a cohort and only offering the intervention to patients in the intervention arm. In oncology, the TwiCs study design has gained increasing interest during the last decade. Despite its potential advantages over RCTs, the TwiCs study design has several methodological challenges that need careful consideration when planning a TwiCs study. In this article, we focus on these challenges and reflect on them using experiences from TwiCs studies initiated in oncology. Important methodological challenges that are discussed are the timing of randomization, the issue of non-compliance (refusal) after randomization in the intervention arm, and the definition of the intention-to-treat effect in a TwiCs study and how this effect is related to its counterpart in standard RCTs.

Indexed as

Research DesignClinical Trial Protocols as TopicCohort StudiesHumansObservational Studies as TopicRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTreatment OutcomeCohort multiple randomized controlled trialEfficacy estimandNon-complianceOncologyTrials within CohortsTwiCs

Identifiers

PMID37179306
PMCPMC10183126
OpenAlexW4376641290

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.