Clinical Trial Recruitment and Follow-Up in Cancer Treatment
Author Information
Author(s): J.L. Haybittle, C.J. Alcock, J.F. Fowler, J.W. Hopewell, M. Rezvani, G. Wiernik
Primary Institution: MRC Cancer Trials Office
Hypothesis
The study investigates how recruitment period, follow-up time, and analysis timing affect the number of events in cancer clinical trials.
Conclusion
The study found that extending follow-up beyond 5 years or delaying analysis beyond 2 years did not significantly improve the precision of results.
Supporting Evidence
- Recruitment started in 1966 and aimed for 900 patients but ended with 713.
- Follow-up was initially planned for a maximum of 10 years.
- Statistical analyses showed no significant differences between treatment arms.
Takeaway
This study shows that in cancer trials, waiting too long to analyze results doesn't help much, and we can save time by planning better.
Methodology
The study analyzed data from a multicenter trial comparing two radiotherapy regimes for laryngo-pharynx cancer over several years.
Limitations
The trial design was influenced by outdated clinical concepts and lacked retrospective data for better planning.
Participant Demographics
Patients treated for cancer of the laryngo-pharynx.
Statistical Information
P-Value
p>0.05
Confidence Interval
1.05 (0.87-1.27) for deaths and 1.14 (0.92-1.43) for local recurrences.
Statistical Significance
p>0.05
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website