ArticleBMC medical research methodology2023
The Trial within Cohorts (TwiCs) study design in oncology: experience and methodological reflections.
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.
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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- Physical health outcomes and step cadence improvements: a digital physical activity intervention in cancer survivors.JNCI cancer spectrum · 2025Trial
- Research Study Attrition and Participant-Informed Retention Strategies Among Cancer Survivors.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Extended cancer registry data for real-world evidence in bladder cancer: an update on the Prospective Bladder Cancer Infrastructure.ESMO real world data and digital oncology · 2026Article
- Real-World Evidence: Better than Nothing or the Future? A Perspective on Clinical Evidence Generation in Interventional Oncology.Cardiovascular and interventional radiology · 2026Review
- Challenges and Potential Solutions to Advance Global Cancer Drug Development.Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science · 2026Review
- Accelerating precision oncology by converging pragmatic trials and real-world evidence.Nature reviews. Drug discovery · 2025Article
- Tafasitamab plus lenalidomide as salvage therapy in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: real-world experience from GELTAMO.Blood advances · 2025Observational
- Precision cancer medicine 2025: some concerns.Acta oncologica (Stockholm, Sweden) · 2025Article
- A "Trial within a Cohort" platform for pediatric clinical trials on idiopathic nephrotic syndrome: scope, objectives, and design of the retrospective-prospective cohort PIN'SNP.Pediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany) · 2025Article
- Tailored guidance to apply the Estimand framework to Trials within Cohorts (TwiCs) studies.Global epidemiology · 2024Article
- PrimerX: A Bayesian Multistage Cohort Embedded Randomised Trial to Evaluate the Role of Deferred Local Therapy of the Primary Tumour in Combination with Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor-based First-line Therapy in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Patients.European urology open science · 2024Article
- Reconsidering nephron-sparing strategies for the management of small renal tumors: a call for the inclusion of level 1 evidence in the debate.Translational andrology and urology · 2024Article
- Article
- Hyperbaric oxygen therapy for chronic radiotherapy-related adverse effects: A clinically focused review.CA: a cancer journal for cliniciansReview
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.