Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 24, 2025
Evaluating the Effectiveness of Cancer Drug Sensitization In Vitro and In Vivo
Published on: February 6, 2015
A landscape of methodology and implementation of adaptive designs in cancer clinical trials
Ying-Ying Zhu1, Wen-Xuan Wang2, Shui-Kit Cheuk3
1Clinical Research Design Division, Clinical Research Center, Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, PR China.
Background:
The use of adaptive designs in cancer trials has considerably increased worldwide in recent years, along with the release of various guidelines for their application. This systematic review aims to comprehensively summarize the key methodological and executive features of adaptive designs in cancer clinical trials.
Methods:
A comprehensive search from PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials was conducted to screen eligible clinical trials that employed adaptive designs and were conducted in cancer patients. The methodological and executive characteristics of adaptive designs were the main measurements extracted. Descriptive analyses, primarily consisting of frequency and percentage, were employed to analyzed and reported the data.
Results:
A total of 180 cancer clinical trials with adaptive designs were identified. The first three most common type of adaptive design was the group sequential design (n=114, 63.3 %), adaptive dose-finding design (n=22, 12.2 %), and adaptive platform design (n=16, 8.9 %). The results showed that 4.4 % (n=8) of trials conducted post hoc modifications, and around 29.4 % (n=53) did not provide the methods for controlling type I errors. Among phase II or above trials, 79.9 % (112/140) applied the surrogate endpoint as the primary outcome in these trials. Importantly, 27.2 % (49/180) of trials did not report clear information on the independent data monitoring committee (iDMC), and 13.3 % (n=24) without clear information on interim analyses. Interim analyses suggested 34.4 % (62/180) of trials being stopped for futility, 10.6 % (n=19) for efficacy, and 2.2 % (n=4) for safety concerns in the early stage.
Conclusions:
This study emphasizes adaptive designs in cancer trials face significant challenges in their design or strict implementation according to protocol, which might significantly compromise the validity and integrity of trials. It is thus important for researchers, sponsors, and policymakers to actively oversee and guide their application.
More Related Videos
10:27Testing Targeted Therapies in Cancer using Structural DNA Alteration Analysis and Patient-Derived Xenografts
Published on: July 25, 2020
08:46Implementation of In Vitro Drug Resistance Assays: Maximizing the Potential for Uncovering Clinically Relevant Resistance Mechanisms
Published on: December 9, 2015
Related Concept Videos
01:21Cancer Survival Analysis
01:16Clinical Trials
There are four phases in a clinical trial. A phase one...
01:23Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
01:16Crossover Experiments
Crossover designs are performed even with smaller sample sizes since the samples can act as their controls. These are better than simple randomized trials since patients are exposed to all the treatments.
02:50Combination Therapies and Personalized Medicine
The combination of the drug acetazolamide and sulforaphane is a good example of combination therapy to treat cancer. The cells in the interior of a large tumor often die due to the hypoxic and...
01:20Study Designs in Epidemiology
Observational studies are those where the researcher does not intervene but rather observes natural variations. They include cross-sectional, cohort, and...