采用自适应设计的医疗器械随机对照试验的特征。

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Gui Su, Dan Shen, Dongyuan Deng, Qianqian Bai, Hui Xie
{"title":"采用自适应设计的医疗器械随机对照试验的特征。","authors":"Gui Su, Dan Shen, Dongyuan Deng, Qianqian Bai, Hui Xie","doi":"10.57264/cer-2024-0011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Aim:</b> Adaptive designs are frequently used in drug randomized controlled trials (RCTs). However, their use in medical device RCTs remains unclear. We aimed to characterize medical device RCTs with adaptive designs. <b>Materials & methods:</b> We searched for adaptive RCTs in the following databases: ClinicalTrials.gov, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number registry. Adaptive design keywords and medical device corporation names were used as terms to search the trial records registered between 1 January 2000 and 18 October 2024 in the databases. The annual number and proportions of adaptive trials were analyzed, and characteristics such as design type, sponsor, therapeutic area, trial stage and regulatory status were summarized. <b>Results:</b> Overall, 105 adaptive RCTs were identified from ClinicalTrials.gov, accounting for 2.112 per 1000 trials in 49,721 medical device clinical trials registered in ClinicalTrials.gov during the period. The average annual number of adaptive RCTs per 1000 clinical trials was the highest (8.55 ± 11.65) during 2005-2010, reduced to 3.33 ± 2.35 during 2011-2016, and significantly decreased to 1.29 ± 0.85 during 2017-2024 (p = 0.011). The most common adaptive designs were group sequential design (GSD, 50.5%), sample size reassessment (SSR, 17.1%) and investigating both superiority and non-inferiority (10.5%). Most RCTs were sponsored by the private sector (62.9%), conducted in Europe/North America (95.2%), in the field of heart disease (46.7%) and post-market trials (76.2%). Compared with pre-market RCTs, post-market RCTs showed more diverse adaptive designs such as response-adaptive randomization and adaptive enrichment. <b>Conclusion:</b> The average annual proportions of adaptive medical device RCTs in ClinicalTrials.gov has reduced in the last 10 years. The most-used adaptive designs in medical device RCTs are GSD, SSR and investigating both superiority and non-inferiority.</p>","PeriodicalId":15539,"journal":{"name":"Journal of comparative effectiveness research","volume":" ","pages":"e240011"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11650385/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Characterization of medical device randomized controlled trials with adaptive designs.\",\"authors\":\"Gui Su, Dan Shen, Dongyuan Deng, Qianqian Bai, Hui Xie\",\"doi\":\"10.57264/cer-2024-0011\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Aim:</b> Adaptive designs are frequently used in drug randomized controlled trials (RCTs). However, their use in medical device RCTs remains unclear. We aimed to characterize medical device RCTs with adaptive designs. <b>Materials & methods:</b> We searched for adaptive RCTs in the following databases: ClinicalTrials.gov, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number registry. Adaptive design keywords and medical device corporation names were used as terms to search the trial records registered between 1 January 2000 and 18 October 2024 in the databases. The annual number and proportions of adaptive trials were analyzed, and characteristics such as design type, sponsor, therapeutic area, trial stage and regulatory status were summarized. <b>Results:</b> Overall, 105 adaptive RCTs were identified from ClinicalTrials.gov, accounting for 2.112 per 1000 trials in 49,721 medical device clinical trials registered in ClinicalTrials.gov during the period. The average annual number of adaptive RCTs per 1000 clinical trials was the highest (8.55 ± 11.65) during 2005-2010, reduced to 3.33 ± 2.35 during 2011-2016, and significantly decreased to 1.29 ± 0.85 during 2017-2024 (p = 0.011). The most common adaptive designs were group sequential design (GSD, 50.5%), sample size reassessment (SSR, 17.1%) and investigating both superiority and non-inferiority (10.5%). Most RCTs were sponsored by the private sector (62.9%), conducted in Europe/North America (95.2%), in the field of heart disease (46.7%) and post-market trials (76.2%). Compared with pre-market RCTs, post-market RCTs showed more diverse adaptive designs such as response-adaptive randomization and adaptive enrichment. <b>Conclusion:</b> The average annual proportions of adaptive medical device RCTs in ClinicalTrials.gov has reduced in the last 10 years. The most-used adaptive designs in medical device RCTs are GSD, SSR and investigating both superiority and non-inferiority.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15539,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of comparative effectiveness research\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"e240011\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11650385/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of comparative effectiveness research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.57264/cer-2024-0011\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/12/9 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of comparative effectiveness research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.57264/cer-2024-0011","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:自适应设计常用于药物随机对照试验(rct)。然而,它们在医疗器械随机对照试验中的应用仍不清楚。我们的目的是表征具有自适应设计的医疗器械随机对照试验。材料与方法:我们在以下数据库中检索适应性随机对照试验:ClinicalTrials.gov、国际临床试验注册平台和国际标准随机对照试验号注册。使用自适应设计关键词和医疗器械公司名称作为检索词,检索数据库中2000年1月1日至2024年10月18日注册的试验记录。分析每年适应性试验的数量和比例,总结设计类型、申办者、治疗领域、试验阶段和监管状况等特点。结果:总体而言,从ClinicalTrials.gov中确定了105项适应性随机对照试验,占期间在ClinicalTrials.gov上注册的49,721项医疗器械临床试验中每1000项试验中的2.112项。2005-2010年每1000项临床试验中适应性随机对照试验(adaptive rct)的年平均值最高,为8.55±11.65项,2011-2016年降至3.33±2.35项,2017-2024年降至1.29±0.85项(p = 0.011)。最常见的适应性设计是组序设计(GSD, 50.5%)、样本量重评估(SSR, 17.1%)和优效性与非劣效性调查(10.5%)。大多数随机对照试验由私营部门赞助(62.9%),在欧洲/北美进行(95.2%),在心脏病领域(46.7%)和上市后试验(76.2%)。与上市前rct相比,上市后rct表现出更多样化的自适应设计,如反应-自适应随机化和自适应富集。结论:在过去10年中,ClinicalTrials.gov网站上适应性医疗器械随机对照试验的平均年比例有所下降。在医疗器械随机对照试验中,最常用的自适应设计是GSD、SSR和优效性与非劣效性调查。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Characterization of medical device randomized controlled trials with adaptive designs.

Aim: Adaptive designs are frequently used in drug randomized controlled trials (RCTs). However, their use in medical device RCTs remains unclear. We aimed to characterize medical device RCTs with adaptive designs. Materials & methods: We searched for adaptive RCTs in the following databases: ClinicalTrials.gov, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number registry. Adaptive design keywords and medical device corporation names were used as terms to search the trial records registered between 1 January 2000 and 18 October 2024 in the databases. The annual number and proportions of adaptive trials were analyzed, and characteristics such as design type, sponsor, therapeutic area, trial stage and regulatory status were summarized. Results: Overall, 105 adaptive RCTs were identified from ClinicalTrials.gov, accounting for 2.112 per 1000 trials in 49,721 medical device clinical trials registered in ClinicalTrials.gov during the period. The average annual number of adaptive RCTs per 1000 clinical trials was the highest (8.55 ± 11.65) during 2005-2010, reduced to 3.33 ± 2.35 during 2011-2016, and significantly decreased to 1.29 ± 0.85 during 2017-2024 (p = 0.011). The most common adaptive designs were group sequential design (GSD, 50.5%), sample size reassessment (SSR, 17.1%) and investigating both superiority and non-inferiority (10.5%). Most RCTs were sponsored by the private sector (62.9%), conducted in Europe/North America (95.2%), in the field of heart disease (46.7%) and post-market trials (76.2%). Compared with pre-market RCTs, post-market RCTs showed more diverse adaptive designs such as response-adaptive randomization and adaptive enrichment. Conclusion: The average annual proportions of adaptive medical device RCTs in ClinicalTrials.gov has reduced in the last 10 years. The most-used adaptive designs in medical device RCTs are GSD, SSR and investigating both superiority and non-inferiority.

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
Journal of comparative effectiveness research
Journal of comparative effectiveness research HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
9.50%
发文量
121
期刊介绍: Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research provides a rapid-publication platform for debate, and for the presentation of new findings and research methodologies. Through rigorous evaluation and comprehensive coverage, the Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research provides stakeholders (including patients, clinicians, healthcare purchasers, and health policy makers) with the key data and opinions to make informed and specific decisions on clinical practice.
×
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