Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39085451›Full record

ArticleTargeted oncology2024

Patient Enrollment per Month (Accrual) in Clinical Trials Leading to the FDA Approval of New Cancer Drugs.

Daniel Tobias Michaeli, Thomas Michaeli, Sebastian Albers, Julia Caroline Michaeli

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Targeted oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Daniel Tobias MichaeliDepartment of Medical Oncology, National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 460, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. danielmichaeli@yahoo.com.ORCID 0000-0003-2913-1867
Thomas MichaeliDepartment of Personalized Oncology, University Hospital Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-0293-9401
Sebastian AlbersDepartment of Trauma Surgery, Klinikum Rechts Der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-6688-764X
Julia Caroline MichaeliDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, LMU University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-6484-7161

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInsufficient patient enrollment per month (=accrual) is the leading cause of cancer trial termination.

objectiveTo identify and quantify factors associated with patient accrual in trials leading to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval of new cancer drugs. DATA: All anti-cancer drugs with FDA approval were identified in the Drugs@FDA database (2000-2022). Data on drug indication's background-, treatment-, disease-, and trial-related factors were collected from FDA labels, clinicaltrials.gov, and the Global Burden of Disease study. The association between patient accrual and collected variables was assessed in Poisson regression models reporting adjusted rate ratios (aRR).

resultsWe identified 170 drugs with approval in 455 cancer indications on the basis of 292 randomized and 163 single-arm trials. Among randomized trials, median enrollment per month was 38 patients (interquartile range [IQR]: 26-54) for non-orphan, 21 (IQR: 15-38, aRR 0.88, p = 0.361) for common orphan, 20 (IQR: 10-35, aRR 0.73, p <0.001) for rare orphan, and 8 (IQR 6-12, aRR 0.30, p < 0.001) for ultra-rare orphan indications. Patient enrollment was positively associated with disease burden [aRR: 1.0003 per disability-adjusted life year (DALY), p < 0.001), trial sites (aRR: 1.001 per site, p < 0.001), participating countries (aRR: 1.02 per country, p < 0.001), and phase 3 vs. 1/2 trials (aRR: 1.64, p = 0.037). Enrollment was negatively associated with advanced-line vs. first-line treatments (aRR: 0.81, p = 0.010) and monotherapy vs. combination treatments (aRR: 0.80, p = 0.007). Patient enrollment per month was similar between indications with and without a biomarker (median: 27 vs. 32, aRR 0.80, p = 0.117). Patient enrollment per month was substantially lower in government-sponsored than industry-sponsored trials (median: 14 vs. 32, aRR 0.80, p = 0.209). Enrollment was not associated with randomization ratios, crossover, and study blinding.

conclusionsDisease incidence and disease burden alongside the number of study sites and participating countries are the main drivers of patient enrollment in clinical trials. For rare disease trials, greater financial incentives could help expedite patient enrollment. Novel trial design features, including skewed randomization, crossover, or open-label masking, did not entice patient enrollment.

Indexed as

Antineoplastic AgentsDrug ApprovalUnited States Food and Drug AdministrationClinical Trials as TopicHumansNeoplasmsUnited StatesAntineoplastic Agents

Identifiers

PMID39085451
PMCPMC11392992

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.