Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 8, 2026

In Silico Clinical Trials for Cardiovascular Disease
Published on: May 27, 2022
Highlighting the need for reliable clinical trials in glioblastoma
Jacob J Mandel1, Michael Youssef1, Ethan Ludmir2
1a Department of Neurology , Baylor College of Medicine , Houston , Texas , USA.
Introduction:
Several recent phase III studies have attempted to improve the dismal survival seen in glioblastoma patients, with disappointing results despite prior promising phase II data. Areas covered: A literature review of prior phase II and phase III studied in glioblastoma was performed to help identify possible areas of concern. Numerous issues in previous phase II trials for glioblastoma were found that may have contributed to these discouraging outcomes and discordant results. Expert commentary: These concerns include the improper selection of therapeutics warranting investigation in a phase III trial, suboptimal design of phase II studies (often lacking a control arm), absence of molecular data, the use of imaging criteria as a surrogate endpoint, and a lack of pharmacodynamic testing. Hopefully, by recognizing prior phase II trial limitations that contributed to failed phase III trials, we can adapt quickly to improve our ability to accurately discover survival-prolonging treatments for glioblastoma patients.
Insights
Phase II glioblastoma trials often fail to predict success in phase III studies due to design flaws. Addressing these issues in early-stage glioblastoma research is crucial for discovering effective treatments.
Area of Science:
- Neuro-oncology
- Clinical trial design
- Glioblastoma research
Background:
- Glioblastoma (GBM) has dismal survival rates, with recent phase III trials failing to improve outcomes.
- Promising phase II glioblastoma trial data have not translated to phase III success.
Purpose of the Study:
- To review prior phase II and III glioblastoma studies.
- To identify limitations in phase II trial design that may explain the failure of subsequent phase III trials.
Main Methods:
- A literature review of published phase II and phase III glioblastoma studies was conducted.
- Analysis focused on identifying common issues and discrepancies between phase II and III trial results.
Main Results:
- Several critical issues were identified in phase II glioblastoma trials, including improper therapeutic selection.
- Suboptimal phase II designs often lacked control arms, molecular data, and pharmacodynamic testing.
- The use of imaging criteria as surrogate endpoints in phase II trials was also a concern.
Conclusions:
- Recognizing and rectifying phase II trial limitations is essential for improving the accuracy of discovering survival-prolonging glioblastoma treatments.
- Improved phase II study designs are needed to better predict efficacy in phase III glioblastoma trials.
Related Concept Videos
Clinical Trials
There are four phases in a clinical trial. A phase one...
Clinical Trials: Overview
Statistical Software for Data Analysis and Clinical Trials
Reliability and Validity
Trial and Error and Algorithm
Distribution Reliability and Automation

