美国、加拿大、英国和法国晚期泌尿生殖系统癌症行业赞助试验 (IST) 与研究者发起试验 (IIT) 的比较

IF 2.3 3区 医学 Q3 ONCOLOGY
Bryan Wong , Jenny Peng , Di Maria Jiang , Karim Fizazi , Thomas Powles , Nick James , Srikala S. Sridhar
{"title":"美国、加拿大、英国和法国晚期泌尿生殖系统癌症行业赞助试验 (IST) 与研究者发起试验 (IIT) 的比较","authors":"Bryan Wong ,&nbsp;Jenny Peng ,&nbsp;Di Maria Jiang ,&nbsp;Karim Fizazi ,&nbsp;Thomas Powles ,&nbsp;Nick James ,&nbsp;Srikala S. Sridhar","doi":"10.1016/j.clgc.2024.102210","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Clinical trials are categorized as industry sponsored trials (ISTs) or investigator-initiated trials (IITs) based on the source of funding and sponsor of the trial. ISTs are usually run by pharmaceutical companies, and are primarily aimed at developing new drugs that ultimately gain regulatory approval. IITs are developed by academic investigators or cooperative groups, often sparked by a clinical need. Both are vital in advancing the field of oncology. To date, little has been published about current trends in ISTs or IITs in genitourinary (GU) oncology. The aim of this study was to assess growth trends of GU oncology ISTs and IITs in 4 countries with similar healthcare infrastructures.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We searched ClinicalTrials.gov for bladder, kidney, and prostate cancer trials conducted in the United States (US), Canada, France, and United Kingdom (UK) from January 2007 to December 2021. Trials were determined to be ISTs or IITs based on their funding source and sponsor. Trials were characterized based on type, purpose, phase, participants, masking, assignment, and allocation.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Overall, 5,834 GU trials were identified, with a balanced distribution of ISTs (n = 3064, n = 52.5%) and IITs (n = 2770, 47.4%). By country, the US conducted the most GU trials (n = 3814) followed by Canada (n = 709), France (n = 677), and the UK (n = 634). Most ISTs were phase 3 trials with over 500 participants while most IITs were open-label phase 2 studies with only 20-49 participants. From 2017 onwards, there was a shift towards more ISTs, most noticeably in Canada and the UK. The COVID-19 pandemic did not have a major impact on the growth of ISTs and IITs.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>The gap between ISTs and IITs continues to widen, likely driven by resource and funding challenges faced by investigators. Barriers to completing IITs need to be better understood to promote IIT development and maintain their academically driven intentions.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":10380,"journal":{"name":"Clinical genitourinary cancer","volume":"22 6","pages":"Article 102210"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Industry-Sponsored Trials (IST) and Investigator-Initiated Trials (IIT) in Advanced Genitourinary Cancers in the United States, Canada, United Kingdom and France\",\"authors\":\"Bryan Wong ,&nbsp;Jenny Peng ,&nbsp;Di Maria Jiang ,&nbsp;Karim Fizazi ,&nbsp;Thomas Powles ,&nbsp;Nick James ,&nbsp;Srikala S. Sridhar\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.clgc.2024.102210\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Clinical trials are categorized as industry sponsored trials (ISTs) or investigator-initiated trials (IITs) based on the source of funding and sponsor of the trial. ISTs are usually run by pharmaceutical companies, and are primarily aimed at developing new drugs that ultimately gain regulatory approval. IITs are developed by academic investigators or cooperative groups, often sparked by a clinical need. Both are vital in advancing the field of oncology. To date, little has been published about current trends in ISTs or IITs in genitourinary (GU) oncology. The aim of this study was to assess growth trends of GU oncology ISTs and IITs in 4 countries with similar healthcare infrastructures.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We searched ClinicalTrials.gov for bladder, kidney, and prostate cancer trials conducted in the United States (US), Canada, France, and United Kingdom (UK) from January 2007 to December 2021. Trials were determined to be ISTs or IITs based on their funding source and sponsor. Trials were characterized based on type, purpose, phase, participants, masking, assignment, and allocation.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Overall, 5,834 GU trials were identified, with a balanced distribution of ISTs (n = 3064, n = 52.5%) and IITs (n = 2770, 47.4%). By country, the US conducted the most GU trials (n = 3814) followed by Canada (n = 709), France (n = 677), and the UK (n = 634). Most ISTs were phase 3 trials with over 500 participants while most IITs were open-label phase 2 studies with only 20-49 participants. From 2017 onwards, there was a shift towards more ISTs, most noticeably in Canada and the UK. The COVID-19 pandemic did not have a major impact on the growth of ISTs and IITs.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>The gap between ISTs and IITs continues to widen, likely driven by resource and funding challenges faced by investigators. Barriers to completing IITs need to be better understood to promote IIT development and maintain their academically driven intentions.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10380,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical genitourinary cancer\",\"volume\":\"22 6\",\"pages\":\"Article 102210\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical genitourinary cancer\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1558767324001800\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical genitourinary cancer","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1558767324001800","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

根据试验的资金来源和赞助商,临床试验可分为行业赞助试验(IST)和研究者发起试验(IIT)。行业赞助试验通常由制药公司进行,主要目的是开发最终获得监管部门批准的新药。IIT 由学术研究人员或合作团体开发,通常由临床需求引发。两者在推动肿瘤学领域的发展方面都至关重要。迄今为止,有关泌尿生殖系统(GU)肿瘤学领域 IST 或 IIT 目前趋势的文章还很少。本研究旨在评估具有类似医疗基础设施的 4 个国家的泌尿生殖系统肿瘤 IST 和 IIT 的增长趋势。我们在 ClinicalTrials.gov 中搜索了 2007 年 1 月至 2021 年 12 月期间在美国、加拿大、法国和英国进行的膀胱癌、肾癌和前列腺癌试验。根据试验的资金来源和赞助商确定试验是IST还是IIT。试验的特征基于类型、目的、阶段、参与者、掩蔽、分配和分配。总体而言,共确定了 5834 项 GU 试验,其中 IST(n = 3064,n = 52.5%)和 IIT(n = 2770,47.4%)分布均衡。从国家来看,美国进行的GU试验最多(n = 3814),其次是加拿大(n = 709)、法国(n = 677)和英国(n = 634)。大多数IST为3期试验,参与者超过500人,而大多数IIT为开放标签2期研究,参与者仅20-49人。从 2017 年起,IST 开始增多,其中以加拿大和英国最为明显。COVID-19 大流行并未对 IST 和 IIT 的增长产生重大影响。IST和IIT之间的差距继续扩大,这可能是研究人员面临的资源和资金挑战造成的。需要更好地了解完成 IIT 的障碍,以促进 IIT 的发展并保持其学术驱动的意图。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of Industry-Sponsored Trials (IST) and Investigator-Initiated Trials (IIT) in Advanced Genitourinary Cancers in the United States, Canada, United Kingdom and France

Background

Clinical trials are categorized as industry sponsored trials (ISTs) or investigator-initiated trials (IITs) based on the source of funding and sponsor of the trial. ISTs are usually run by pharmaceutical companies, and are primarily aimed at developing new drugs that ultimately gain regulatory approval. IITs are developed by academic investigators or cooperative groups, often sparked by a clinical need. Both are vital in advancing the field of oncology. To date, little has been published about current trends in ISTs or IITs in genitourinary (GU) oncology. The aim of this study was to assess growth trends of GU oncology ISTs and IITs in 4 countries with similar healthcare infrastructures.

Methods

We searched ClinicalTrials.gov for bladder, kidney, and prostate cancer trials conducted in the United States (US), Canada, France, and United Kingdom (UK) from January 2007 to December 2021. Trials were determined to be ISTs or IITs based on their funding source and sponsor. Trials were characterized based on type, purpose, phase, participants, masking, assignment, and allocation.

Results

Overall, 5,834 GU trials were identified, with a balanced distribution of ISTs (n = 3064, n = 52.5%) and IITs (n = 2770, 47.4%). By country, the US conducted the most GU trials (n = 3814) followed by Canada (n = 709), France (n = 677), and the UK (n = 634). Most ISTs were phase 3 trials with over 500 participants while most IITs were open-label phase 2 studies with only 20-49 participants. From 2017 onwards, there was a shift towards more ISTs, most noticeably in Canada and the UK. The COVID-19 pandemic did not have a major impact on the growth of ISTs and IITs.

Conclusion

The gap between ISTs and IITs continues to widen, likely driven by resource and funding challenges faced by investigators. Barriers to completing IITs need to be better understood to promote IIT development and maintain their academically driven intentions.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Clinical genitourinary cancer
Clinical genitourinary cancer 医学-泌尿学与肾脏学
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
6.20%
发文量
201
审稿时长
54 days
期刊介绍: Clinical Genitourinary Cancer is a peer-reviewed journal that publishes original articles describing various aspects of clinical and translational research in genitourinary cancers. Clinical Genitourinary Cancer is devoted to articles on detection, diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of genitourinary cancers. The main emphasis is on recent scientific developments in all areas related to genitourinary malignancies. Specific areas of interest include clinical research and mechanistic approaches; drug sensitivity and resistance; gene and antisense therapy; pathology, markers, and prognostic indicators; chemoprevention strategies; multimodality therapy; and integration of various approaches.
×
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