Are outcome-adaptive allocation trials ethical?

Clinical Trials

Volumn 12, Issue 2, 2015, Pages 102-106

  Hey, Spencer Phillips ^a   Kimmelman, Jonathan ^a  

^a MCGILL UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

Adaptive randomization; equipoise; ethics; therapeutic misconception

Indexed keywords

CLINICAL DECISION MAKING; CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); EQUIPOISE; HUMAN; INFORMED CONSENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOMIZATION; RESEARCH ETHICS; REVIEW; SAMPLE SIZE; THERAPEUTIC MISCONCEPTION; VALIDITY; ETHICS; METHODOLOGY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC);

HUMANS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; RESEARCH DESIGN;

EID: 84924915397     PISSN: 17407745     EISSN: 17407753     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1740774514563583     Document Type: Review

References (23)

1. Weijer C, Miller PB. When are research risks reasonable in relation to anticipated benefits?. Nat Med. 2004 ; 10: 570-573
2. London AJ The Oxford Handbook of Bioethics. Steinbock B, ed. New York: Oxford University Press ; 2007: 571-596.
3. Dumville JC, Hahn S, Miles JNV, et al. The use of unequal randomisation ratios in clinical trials: a review. Contemp Clin Trials. 2006 ; 27: 1-12
4. Biswas S, Liu DD, Lee JJ, et al. Bayesian clinical trials at the university of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center. Clin Trials. 2009 ; 6: 205-216
5. Lee JJ, Chen N, Yin G. Worth adapting? Revisiting the usefulness of outcome-adaptive randomization. Clin Cancer Res. 2012 ; 18: 4498-4507
6. Meurer WJ, Lewis RJ, Berry DA. Adaptive clinical trials: a partial remedy for the therapeutic misconception?. JAMA. 2012 ; 307: 2377-2378
7. Collins SP, Lindsell CJ, Pang PS, et al. Bayesian adaptive trial design in acute heart failure syndromes: moving beyond the mega trial. Am Heart J. 2012 ; 164: 138-145
8. Hey SP, Kimmelman J. The questionable use of unequal allocation in confirmatory trials. Neurology. 2014 ; 82: 77-79
9. Maki RG, Wathen JK, Patel SR, et al. Randomized phase II study of gemcitabine and docetaxel compared with gemcitabine alone in patients with metastatic soft tissue sarcomas: results of sarcoma alliance for research through collaboration study 002. J Clin Oncol. 2007 ; 25: 2755-2763
10. Garcia-Manero G, Jabbour E, Borthakur G, et al. Randomized open-label phase II study of decitabine in patients with low-or intermediate-risk myelodysplastic syndromes. J Clin Oncol. 2013 ; 31: 2548-2553
11. Giles FJ, Kantarjian HM, Cortes JE, et al. Adaptive randomized study of idarubicin and cytarabine versus troxacitabine and cytarabine versus troxacitabine and idarubicin in untreated patients 50 years or older with adverse karyotype acute myeloid leukemia. J Clin Oncol. 2003 ; 21: 1722-1727
12. Kim ES, Herbst RS, Wistuba II, et al. The battle trial: personalizing therapy for lung cancer. Cancer Discov. 2011 ; 1: 44-53
13. Zia MI, Siu LL, Pond GR, et al. Comparison of outcomes of phase II studies and subsequent randomized control studies using identical chemotherapeutic regimens. J Clin Oncol. 2005 ; 23: 6982-6991
14. Hay M, Thomas DW, Craighead JL, et al. Clinical development success rates for investigational drugs. Nature Biotechnol. 2014 ; 32: 40-51
15. Djulbegovic B, Kumar A, Glasziou P, et al. Trial unpredictability yields predictable therapy gains. Nature. 2013 ; 500: 395-396
16. Berry DA. Adaptive clinical trials: the promise and the caution. J Clin Oncol. 2011 ; 29: 606-609
17. Food and Drug Administration. Draft Guidance for industry: adaptive design clinical trials for drugs and biologics, Silver Spring, MD: Office of Communication, Division of Drug Information, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, 2010. http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/... /Guidances/ucm201790.pdf (accessed 5 December 2014).
18. Horng S, Grady C. Misunderstanding in clinical research: distinguishing therapeutic misconception, therapeutic misestimation, and therapeutic optimism. IRB. 2003 ; 1: 11-16
19. Appelbaum PS, Roth LH, Lidz CW, et al. False hopes and best data: consent to research and the therapeutic misconception. Hastings Cent Rep. 1987 ; 17: 20-24
20. Saxman SB. Ethical considerations for outcome-adaptive trial designs: a clinical researcher's perspective. Bioethics. 2014 ;:
21. Van der Graaf R, Roes KCB, van Delden JJM. Adaptive trials in clinical research: scientific and ethical issues to consider. JAMA. 2012 ; 307: 2379-2380
22. Korn EL, Freidlin B. Outcome-adaptive randomization: is it useful?. J Clin Oncol. 2011 ; 29: 771-776
23. Tehranisa JS, Meurer WJ. Can response-adaptive randomization increase participation in acute stroke trials?. Stroke. 2014 ; 45: 2131-2133