Suppr超能文献

胃食管癌症临床试验:对 ClinicalTrials.gov 中干预性试验的全球格局分析。

Clinical Trials in Gastroesophageal Cancers: An Analysis of the Global Landscape of Interventional Trials From ClinicalTrials.gov.

机构信息

Mass General Brigham Salem Hospital, Salem, MA.

St Elizabeth's Medical Center, Brighton, MA.

出版信息

JCO Glob Oncol. 2024 Aug;10:e2400169. doi: 10.1200/GO.24.00169.

Abstract

PURPOSE

To describe the global landscape of clinical research into interventions for gastroesophageal cancers (GECs), with examination of trial characteristics, geographic distribution of trial sites, and factors associated with trial termination.

METHODS

We queried ClinicalTrials.gov to identify all completed or terminated phase III interventional studies investigating GECs (esophageal squamous cell carcinoma [ESCC], esophageal adenocarcinoma [EAC], gastroesophageal junctional [GEJ], and gastric adenocarcinoma). Data on all reported trial characteristics were extracted. Pearson's chi-square and Fisher's exact tests were used to compare differences in completed and terminated trials. Multivariate logistic regression evaluated predictors of termination.

RESULTS

A total of 179 trials were identified; of these, 90% were therapeutic. Most included sites in Asia (61%) and Europe (32%); few included sites in Africa (4%). Thirty percent included sites in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Most (70%) focused on gastric or GEJ adenocarcinoma, 13% on EAC and ESCC, and 9% on ESCC alone. Sixteen percent (n = 29) of trials terminated prematurely. In multivariate analysis, study site number, location of recruitment sites, and patient population emerged as predictors of termination. Trials recruiting from US-based sites were more likely to terminate (odds ratio [OR], 7.22 [95% CI, 1.59 to 32.69]). Trials conducted exclusively in LMICs were less likely to terminate (OR, 0.04 [95% CI, 0.01 to 0.59] conducted in high-income countries [HICs] alone). Studies on ESCC were more likely to terminate (OR, 17.74 [95% CI, 1.49 to 210.69]).

CONCLUSION

Although 80% of GECs occur in LMICs, trial activity disproportionately occurs in HICs. Few trials focus on EAC/ESCC despite being highly fatal, highlighting an unmet need. Overall, this study highlights (1) a missed opportunity to recruit patients from high-incidence regions globally; and (2) a pressing need for increasing funding, infrastructure, and support for GEC trials in LMICs.

摘要

目的

描述全球范围内针对胃食管癌症(GEC)干预措施的临床研究概况,考察试验特征、试验地点的地理分布以及与试验终止相关的因素。

方法

我们在 ClinicalTrials.gov 上检索了所有已完成或终止的 III 期干预性 GEC(食管鳞状细胞癌[ESCC]、食管腺癌[EAC]、胃食管交界处[GEJ]和胃腺癌)研究。提取所有报告的试验特征数据。采用 Pearson 卡方检验和 Fisher 确切检验比较完成和终止试验之间的差异。多变量逻辑回归评估了终止的预测因素。

结果

共确定了 179 项试验;其中 90%为治疗性试验。大多数试验纳入了亚洲(61%)和欧洲(32%)的试验点;只有少数纳入了非洲(4%)的试验点。30%的试验纳入了中低收入国家(LMICs)的试验点。大多数(70%)试验集中于胃或 GEJ 腺癌,13%的试验集中于 EAC 和 ESCC,9%的试验集中于 ESCC。16%(n=29)的试验提前终止。多变量分析显示,试验点数量、招募点位置和患者人群是终止的预测因素。从美国试验点招募的试验更有可能终止(比值比[OR],7.22[95%CI,1.59 至 32.69])。仅在 LMICs 开展的试验不太可能终止(OR,0.04[95%CI,0.01 至 0.59]),而仅在高收入国家(HICs)开展的试验(OR,0.04[95%CI,0.01 至 0.59])则不太可能终止。ESCC 的研究更有可能终止(OR,17.74[95%CI,1.49 至 210.69])。

结论

尽管 80%的 GEC 发生在 LMICs,但试验活动却不成比例地发生在 HICs。尽管 EAC/ESCC 死亡率很高,但很少有试验关注这两种癌症,这突显了未满足的需求。总的来说,这项研究突出了(1)在全球范围内错失了从高发病率地区招募患者的机会;(2)迫切需要增加对 LMIC 中 GEC 试验的资金、基础设施和支持。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验