↓ Skip to main content

Adding a treatment arm to an ongoing clinical trial: a review of methodology and practice

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
41 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Adding a treatment arm to an ongoing clinical trial: a review of methodology and practice
Published in
Trials, April 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13063-015-0697-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dena R Cohen, Susan Todd, Walter M Gregory, Julia M Brown

Abstract

Incorporating an emerging therapy as a new randomisation arm in a clinical trial that is open to recruitment would be desirable to researchers, regulators and patients to ensure that the trial remains current, new treatments are evaluated as quickly as possible, and the time and cost for determining optimal therapies is minimised. It may take many years to run a clinical trial from concept to reporting within a rapidly changing drug development environment; hence, in order for trials to be most useful to inform policy and practice, it is advantageous for them to be able to adapt to emerging therapeutic developments. This paper reports a comprehensive literature review on methodologies for, and practical examples of, amending an ongoing clinical trial by adding a new treatment arm. Relevant methodological literature describing statistical considerations required when making this specific type of amendment is identified, and the key statistical concepts when planning the addition of a new treatment arm are extracted, assessed and summarised. For completeness, this includes an assessment of statistical recommendations within general adaptive design guidance documents. Examples of confirmatory ongoing trials designed within the frequentist framework that have added an arm in practice are reported; and the details of the amendment are reviewed. An assessment is made as to how well the relevant statistical considerations were addressed in practice, and the related implications. The literature review confirmed that there is currently no clear methodological guidance on this topic, but that guidance would be advantageous to help this efficient design amendment to be used more frequently and appropriately in practice. Eight confirmatory trials were identified to have added a treatment arm, suggesting that trials can benefit from this amendment and that it can be practically feasible; however, the trials were not always able to address the key statistical considerations, often leading to uninterpretable or invalid outcomes. If the statistical concepts identified within this review are considered and addressed during the design of a trial amendment, it is possible to effectively assess a new treatment arm within an ongoing trial without compromising the original trial outcomes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 40 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 17%
Other 5 12%
Student > Master 5 12%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 10%
Other 5 12%
Unknown 5 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 29%
Mathematics 5 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 5%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 5%
Other 7 17%
Unknown 10 24%