Department of Oncology, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Department of Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Cancer Med. 2024 Jul;13(13):e7447. doi: 10.1002/cam4.7447.
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the gold standard for evaluating the comparative efficacy and safety of new cancer therapies. However, enrolling patients in control arms of clinical trials can be challenging for rare cancers, particularly in the context of precision oncology and targeted therapies. External Control Arms (ECAs) are a potential solution to address these challenges in clinical research design. We conducted a scoping review to explore the use of ECAs in oncology.
We systematically searched four databases, namely MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Scopus. We screened titles, abstracts, and full texts for eligible articles focusing on patients undergoing therapy for cancer, employing ECAs, and reporting clinical outcomes.
Of the 629 articles screened, 23 were included in this review. The earliest included studies were published in 1996, while most studies were published in the past 5 years. 44% (10/23) of ECAs were employed in blood-related cancer studies. Geographically, 30% (7/23) of studies were conducted in the United States, 22% (5/23) in Japan, and 9% (2/23) in South Korea. The primary data sources used to construct the ECAs involved pooled data from previous trials (35%, 8/23), administrative health databases (17%, 4/23) and electronic medical records (17%, 4/23). While 52% (12/23) of the studies employed methods to align treatment and ECAs characteristics, 48% (11/23) lacked explicit strategies.
ECAs offer a valuable approach in oncology research, particularly when alternative designs are not feasible. However, careful methodological planning and detailed reporting are essential for meaningful and reliable results.
随机对照试验(RCT)是评估新癌症疗法比较疗效和安全性的金标准。然而,对于罕见癌症,特别是在精准肿瘤学和靶向治疗的背景下,在临床试验的对照组中招募患者可能具有挑战性。外部对照臂(ECA)是解决临床研究设计中这些挑战的一种潜在方法。我们进行了范围性综述,以探讨 ECA 在肿瘤学中的应用。
我们系统地搜索了四个数据库,即 MEDLINE、EMBASE、Web of Science 和 Scopus。我们筛选了标题、摘要和全文,以确定关注接受癌症治疗、使用 ECA 并报告临床结局的合格文章。
在筛选的 629 篇文章中,有 23 篇被纳入本综述。最早纳入的研究发表于 1996 年,而大多数研究发表于过去 5 年。44%(10/23)的 ECA 用于血液相关癌症研究。从地理位置上看,30%(7/23)的研究在美国进行,22%(5/23)在日本,9%(2/23)在韩国。用于构建 ECA 的主要原始数据来源包括来自以前试验的汇总数据(35%,8/23)、行政健康数据库(17%,4/23)和电子病历(17%,4/23)。虽然 52%(12/23)的研究采用了使治疗和 ECA 特征保持一致的方法,但 48%(11/23)的研究缺乏明确的策略。
ECA 在肿瘤学研究中提供了一种有价值的方法,特别是在替代设计不可行的情况下。然而,为了获得有意义和可靠的结果,精心的方法学规划和详细的报告至关重要。