Design of clinical trials in integrative medicine: The issue of personalization

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q3 INTEGRATIVE & COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE
Kam Wa Chan , Jian-ping Liu , Zhao-xiang Bian
{"title":"Design of clinical trials in integrative medicine: The issue of personalization","authors":"Kam Wa Chan ,&nbsp;Jian-ping Liu ,&nbsp;Zhao-xiang Bian","doi":"10.1016/j.eujim.2024.102365","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>Classic randomized controlled trial design provides information about the effectiveness of a treatment at population level. In clinical practice based on precision medicine, we seek study designs that provide estimates accounting for individual patients’ demographics and context. Integrative medicine has a strong emphasis on personalization, and there is a pressing need for advancements in trial design to support clinical decisions.</p></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><p>To enhance the generalizability and implementation of research evidence, study designs first need to mimic the real-world from both the clinicians’ and patients’ perspectives, which could be optimized based on stakeholder analysis. Previous stakeholder analyzes showed that the lack of personalization in clinical trial design is a key challenge for the adoption of evidence clinically. Variations of randomized controlled trial design including better-powered and better-designed subgroup analysis, pragmatic design, the N-of-1 cross-over design, and adaptive design have been introduced to personalize clinical trials. Each of these variations has unique advantages, assumptions and limitations. Stratified randomization can be used to divide a disease population into subgroups according to different schools of theory to match with the corresponding treatment, while preserving the generalizability to general readership. Patient-level meta-analysis can improve the power and precision of subgroup analysis. Enrichment design can increase the efficiency of a trial in detecting treatment effect(s) and in mimicking actual clinical use. Practical issues, including bias control and assessment in pragmatic trials, and N-of-1 trials are also discussed with recent trials as examples. We suggest strategies to maximize the validity and translation potential of clinical trials in integrative medicine with pragmatic or personalized design.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Variations of randomized controlled trial design improve the precision of estimates at patient level, which should be carefully considered in the trial design of integrative medicine according to the context of the future application of evidence.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":11932,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Integrative Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Integrative Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1876382024000350","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INTEGRATIVE & COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

Classic randomized controlled trial design provides information about the effectiveness of a treatment at population level. In clinical practice based on precision medicine, we seek study designs that provide estimates accounting for individual patients’ demographics and context. Integrative medicine has a strong emphasis on personalization, and there is a pressing need for advancements in trial design to support clinical decisions.

Discussion

To enhance the generalizability and implementation of research evidence, study designs first need to mimic the real-world from both the clinicians’ and patients’ perspectives, which could be optimized based on stakeholder analysis. Previous stakeholder analyzes showed that the lack of personalization in clinical trial design is a key challenge for the adoption of evidence clinically. Variations of randomized controlled trial design including better-powered and better-designed subgroup analysis, pragmatic design, the N-of-1 cross-over design, and adaptive design have been introduced to personalize clinical trials. Each of these variations has unique advantages, assumptions and limitations. Stratified randomization can be used to divide a disease population into subgroups according to different schools of theory to match with the corresponding treatment, while preserving the generalizability to general readership. Patient-level meta-analysis can improve the power and precision of subgroup analysis. Enrichment design can increase the efficiency of a trial in detecting treatment effect(s) and in mimicking actual clinical use. Practical issues, including bias control and assessment in pragmatic trials, and N-of-1 trials are also discussed with recent trials as examples. We suggest strategies to maximize the validity and translation potential of clinical trials in integrative medicine with pragmatic or personalized design.

Conclusion

Variations of randomized controlled trial design improve the precision of estimates at patient level, which should be carefully considered in the trial design of integrative medicine according to the context of the future application of evidence.

综合医学临床试验的设计:个性化问题
导言:经典的随机对照试验设计可提供群体水平的治疗效果信息。在以精准医学为基础的临床实践中,我们寻求的研究设计应能根据个体患者的人口统计学特征和具体情况提供估计值。讨论为了提高研究证据的可推广性和可实施性,研究设计首先需要从临床医生和患者的角度模拟真实世界,并在利益相关者分析的基础上进行优化。以往的利益相关者分析表明,临床试验设计缺乏个性化是临床采用证据的主要挑战。为了实现临床试验的个性化,随机对照试验设计出现了多种变体,包括更强大和设计更好的亚组分析、实用主义设计、N-of-1交叉设计和适应性设计。每种变体都有其独特的优势、假设和局限性。分层随机化可用于根据不同学派的理论将疾病人群划分为亚组,以匹配相应的治疗方法,同时保留对普通读者的普适性。患者层面的荟萃分析可以提高亚组分析的功率和精确度。丰富设计可以提高试验在检测治疗效果和模拟实际临床应用方面的效率。我们还以最近的试验为例,讨论了实用性问题,包括实用性试验中的偏倚控制和评估,以及 N-of-1 试验。结论随机对照试验设计的变异提高了患者水平的估计精度,在综合医学试验设计中应根据未来证据应用的背景加以仔细考虑。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
European Journal of Integrative Medicine
European Journal of Integrative Medicine INTEGRATIVE & COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE-
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
4.00%
发文量
102
审稿时长
33 days
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Integrative Medicine (EuJIM) considers manuscripts from a wide range of complementary and integrative health care disciplines, with a particular focus on whole systems approaches, public health, self management and traditional medical systems. The journal strives to connect conventional medicine and evidence based complementary medicine. We encourage submissions reporting research with relevance for integrative clinical practice and interprofessional education. EuJIM aims to be of interest to both conventional and integrative audiences, including healthcare practitioners, researchers, health care organisations, educationalists, and all those who seek objective and critical information on integrative medicine. To achieve this aim EuJIM provides an innovative international and interdisciplinary platform linking researchers and clinicians. The journal focuses primarily on original research articles including systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials, other clinical studies, qualitative, observational and epidemiological studies. In addition we welcome short reviews, opinion articles and contributions relating to health services and policy, health economics and psychology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信