确定癌症临床研究中实用临床试验的作用:由欧洲癌症研究和治疗组织主办的合作研讨会的结果

Fábio Cardoso Borges, Winette T A van der Graaf, Robbe Saesen, Stefan Aebi, Ana E Amariutei, Justin Bekelman, Thierry Gorlia, Frank Hulstaert, Isabelle Huys, Paul Kluetz, Michael J Morris, Vijay Patil, Sheila A Prindiville, Richard L Schilsky, Andrew Thomson, Shaun Treweek, Michael Weller, Mira Zuidgeest, Valesca Retel, Denis Lacombe
{"title":"确定癌症临床研究中实用临床试验的作用:由欧洲癌症研究和治疗组织主办的合作研讨会的结果","authors":"Fábio Cardoso Borges, Winette T A van der Graaf, Robbe Saesen, Stefan Aebi, Ana E Amariutei, Justin Bekelman, Thierry Gorlia, Frank Hulstaert, Isabelle Huys, Paul Kluetz, Michael J Morris, Vijay Patil, Sheila A Prindiville, Richard L Schilsky, Andrew Thomson, Shaun Treweek, Michael Weller, Mira Zuidgeest, Valesca Retel, Denis Lacombe","doi":"10.1016/s1470-2045(24)00756-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Explanatory clinical trials, which focus on evaluating therapeutic efficacy under ideal circumstances, are crucial for learning about new therapeutic interventions; however, they also exhibit shortcomings. These include non-representative populations and frequent use of intermediate endpoints, leading to uncertainty about the applicability of study results to patients in the real-world. Moreover, these trials often do not address all clinically meaningful questions, highlighting the need for optimisation within the oncology research framework. Refinements can be partly achieved by incorporating more pragmatic elements into cancer clinical trials. At a virtual European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer workshop, key stakeholders convened to discuss the methodological characteristics and value of pragmatic trials, which focus on evaluating effectiveness in routine clinical practice, and their capacity to address the efficacy–effectiveness gap. This Policy Review outlines and discusses some of the views and perspectives expressed on the role of pragmatic trials in the current framework and their ability to inform decision making, and the recommended priorities for enhancing pragmatism in cancer clinical research.","PeriodicalId":22865,"journal":{"name":"The Lancet Oncology","volume":"9 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Defining the role of pragmatic clinical trials in cancer clinical research: outcomes of a collaborative workshop hosted by the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer\",\"authors\":\"Fábio Cardoso Borges, Winette T A van der Graaf, Robbe Saesen, Stefan Aebi, Ana E Amariutei, Justin Bekelman, Thierry Gorlia, Frank Hulstaert, Isabelle Huys, Paul Kluetz, Michael J Morris, Vijay Patil, Sheila A Prindiville, Richard L Schilsky, Andrew Thomson, Shaun Treweek, Michael Weller, Mira Zuidgeest, Valesca Retel, Denis Lacombe\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/s1470-2045(24)00756-3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Explanatory clinical trials, which focus on evaluating therapeutic efficacy under ideal circumstances, are crucial for learning about new therapeutic interventions; however, they also exhibit shortcomings. These include non-representative populations and frequent use of intermediate endpoints, leading to uncertainty about the applicability of study results to patients in the real-world. Moreover, these trials often do not address all clinically meaningful questions, highlighting the need for optimisation within the oncology research framework. Refinements can be partly achieved by incorporating more pragmatic elements into cancer clinical trials. At a virtual European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer workshop, key stakeholders convened to discuss the methodological characteristics and value of pragmatic trials, which focus on evaluating effectiveness in routine clinical practice, and their capacity to address the efficacy–effectiveness gap. This Policy Review outlines and discusses some of the views and perspectives expressed on the role of pragmatic trials in the current framework and their ability to inform decision making, and the recommended priorities for enhancing pragmatism in cancer clinical research.\",\"PeriodicalId\":22865,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Lancet Oncology\",\"volume\":\"9 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Lancet Oncology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/s1470-2045(24)00756-3\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Lancet Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/s1470-2045(24)00756-3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

解释性临床试验侧重于评估理想情况下的治疗效果,对于了解新的治疗干预措施至关重要;然而,它们也有缺点。这些包括非代表性人群和频繁使用中间终点,导致研究结果对现实世界患者适用性的不确定性。此外,这些试验往往不能解决所有有临床意义的问题,突出了在肿瘤研究框架内优化的必要性。通过在癌症临床试验中加入更务实的因素,可以在一定程度上实现改进。在一个虚拟的欧洲癌症研究和治疗组织研讨会上,主要利益相关者聚集在一起讨论实用试验的方法学特征和价值,其重点是评估常规临床实践中的有效性,以及它们解决疗效差距的能力。本政策评论概述并讨论了一些关于实用试验在当前框架中的作用及其为决策提供信息的能力的观点和观点,以及在癌症临床研究中加强实用主义的建议优先事项。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Defining the role of pragmatic clinical trials in cancer clinical research: outcomes of a collaborative workshop hosted by the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer
Explanatory clinical trials, which focus on evaluating therapeutic efficacy under ideal circumstances, are crucial for learning about new therapeutic interventions; however, they also exhibit shortcomings. These include non-representative populations and frequent use of intermediate endpoints, leading to uncertainty about the applicability of study results to patients in the real-world. Moreover, these trials often do not address all clinically meaningful questions, highlighting the need for optimisation within the oncology research framework. Refinements can be partly achieved by incorporating more pragmatic elements into cancer clinical trials. At a virtual European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer workshop, key stakeholders convened to discuss the methodological characteristics and value of pragmatic trials, which focus on evaluating effectiveness in routine clinical practice, and their capacity to address the efficacy–effectiveness gap. This Policy Review outlines and discusses some of the views and perspectives expressed on the role of pragmatic trials in the current framework and their ability to inform decision making, and the recommended priorities for enhancing pragmatism in cancer clinical research.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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