Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

A 25-year review of sequential methodology in clinical studies.

This paper explores the theoretical developments and subsequent uptake of sequential methodology in clinical studies in the 25 years since Statistics in Medicine was launched. The review examines the contributions which have been made to all four phases into which clinical trials are traditionally classified and highlights major statistical advancements, together with assessing application of the techniques. The vast majority of work has been in the setting of phase III clinical trials and so emphasis will be placed here. Finally, comments are given indicating how the subject area may develop in the future.

Clinical Trials as Topic↗

Efficacy of oxaliplatin in the treatment of colorectal cancer.

Colorectal cancer is one of the leading causes of cancer death. The mainstay of chemotherapy in colorectal cancer patients for the past 40 years has been fluorouracil (5-FU). Oxaliplatin (Eloxatin) is a novel platinum compound with promising activity in colorectal cancer. As a single agent, oxaliplatin has produced response rates of 12% to 24% in patients with previously untreated advanced colorectal cancer, and 10% to 11% in patients with relapsed or refractory advanced colorectal cancer. In phase II trials, oxaliplatin combined with 5-FU, with or without leucovorin, was associated with response rates of 60% and higher when used as front-line therapy, and when used in patients with relapsed or refractory advanced colorectal cancer, response rates ranged from 25% to 50%. In the front-line setting, two randomized trials of 5-FU and leucovorin, with or without oxaliplatin, demonstrated that the addition of oxaliplatin significantly increases response rate and time to tumor progression, but not survival, over 5-FU plus leucovorin alone. The reasons for this discrepancy are unclear, and several possibilities are being considered. Additional phase III trials are underway to clarify the contribution of oxaliplatin in the treatment of patients with locally advanced and metastatic colorectal cancer.

Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols↗

Clinical trial design in metastatic breast cancer: a commentary.

Trial designs traditionally used in the development of new anti-cancer agents are usually categorized as phase I, phase II, phase III and phase IV. Such trials are often performed in patients with metastatic cancer. Phase I trials are conducted in small numbers of patients to determine a drug's maximally tolerated dose (MTD) and toxicity profile. In phase II studies, the anti-tumor activity of the new agent is tested in different tumor types. If a drug is found to be promising in phase II studies, it is then compared to standard therapy through a randomized trial design in phase III studies. In phase IV studies, the efficacy and safety profile of the drug are evaluated in a standard clinical setting. In the field of oncology, studies have been conducted in which agents already approved by the regulatory agency are combined with other anti-cancer drugs and evaluated for anti-tumor efficacy. These have also been termed phase II studies.

Antineoplastic Agents↗

[Difficulties with conducting clinical trials in France].

France ranks third among European countries as regards the level of investment in clinical R&D and, overall, accounts for a contributive effort proportional to the size of its population and pharmaceutical market respectively. However, there is a trend for phase II and III studies to become proportionally fewer than in the past, while the number of phase IV studies is increasing. In a growing proportion of the mega-trials, which are instrumental for establishing evidence-based practice, French experts, investigators and, even more seriously, French patients, are insufficiently represented. Though studies in France are initiated relatively fast due to a clear regulatory framework and perform equally well as far as quantitative and qualitative factors are concerned, compared with most European countries involved in clinical research the costs incurred per completed patient are higher than those recorded in the other countries. Academic research shares most of these constraints and suffers from a lack of financial and human resources, while it faces additional delays in implementing studies because of longer administrative processes. Given the stakes in play, specific solutions should be implemented to maintain and further develop French competitiveness in clinical R&D. At the patient level, positive perception and awareness of the usefulness and safety of participating in clinical trials need to be emphasized. Education at the school level and using the lay media should be developed. Intervention of institutional and government officials is much needed. Direct patient recruitment should be developed through advertisement and the Internet, as well as within doctors' offices and through collaboration with patients' organizations. Patient information and consent forms should be made much simpler than those imposed within the framework of global studies because of FDA requirements. The French health system discourages the recruitment of patients by investigators who are not the family doctor or the usual care provider. Thus, motivation and education of general practitioners and hospital doctors may be increased by involving them during the trial design phase and in the publication process. Specific administrative solutions, within private or public institutions, need to be developed for investigators who do not personally wish to receive investigation fees. Because of lack of availability, investigators need to be assisted with study nurse services and site management organizations, particularly within hospitals and clinics, using the model of the Clinical Investigation Centres. Networks of clinical investigation centres and of individual investigators need to be created. Implementing these solutions should lead to better implications for and reputation of French clinical research.

Clinical Trials as Topic↗

[Clinical trials. An overview].

Since the mid-1950s, the basis for evaluating medical therapies has shifted from transferred knowledge, subjective impression and personal experience towards clinical trials, first, in reaction to side effect tragedies, in drug licensing, then to a growing extent in other parts of medicine such as the assessment of medical devices or surgical procedures. Clinical trials are prospective studies of the efficacy and safety of therapies by repeated application. For this purpose, therapies are usually compared to controls, based on statistical reasoning. Initial comparability of study groups is best guaranteed by randomisation while equality of observation and of concomitant treatment is best guaranteed by blinding. Clinical trials do not result in clear-cut yes/no answers, but reduce the range of reasonable interpretations regarding efficacy and safety of a therapy. Thus, they allow decisions to be made on solid objective grounds. In this way, clinical trials have contributed substantially to medical progress over the last 50 years and are indispensable for today's medical research.

Clinical Trials as Topic↗

Design of field trials for the evaluation of antibacterial products for therapy of bovine clinical mastitis.

In this paper, the design and statistical analysis of field trials for the evaluation of the efficacy of clinical mastitis therapeutics is covered. First, general issues underlying the design of clinical trials are reviewed. These include bias and confounding; randomization and blocking; and study objectives and choice of the corresponding hypothesis. Specific issues in the design of clinical mastitis trials are also discussed. Selection of subjects is discussed with regard to choice of experimental units, identification of reference population and study population, inclusion and exclusion criteria, and sample size calculation. Next, a section on treatment administration and evaluation of cure reviews treatment, blinding, choice of response measure, as well as compliance, withdrawal, and early termination. The statistical analysis section addresses possible statistical models, treatment of confounding, and fixed vs. random effects. In conclusion, well-conducted clinical mastitis trials represent an invaluable, albeit difficult and expensive, effort to evaluate efficacy and tolerance under usual circumstances of use.

Animals↗

Cardiovascular thrombotic events in controlled, clinical trials of rofecoxib.

BACKGROUND: In comparing aspirin, nonselective nonsteroidal antiinflammatory agents (NSAIDs), and cyclooxygenase (COX)-2 inhibitors, variation in platelet inhibitory effects exists that may be associated with differential risks of cardiovascular (CV) thrombotic events. Among the randomized, controlled trials with the COX-2 inhibitor rofecoxib, one study demonstrated a significant difference between rofecoxib and its NSAID comparator (naproxen) in the risk of CV thrombotic events. A combined analysis of individual patient data was undertaken to determine whether there was an excess of CV thrombotic events in patients treated with rofecoxib compared with those treated with placebo or nonselective NSAIDs. METHODS AND RESULTS: CV thrombotic events were assessed across 23 phase IIb to V rofecoxib studies. Comparisons were made between patients taking rofecoxib and those taking either placebo, naproxen (an NSAID with near-complete inhibition of platelet function throughout its dosing interval), or another nonselective NSAIDs used in the development program (diclofenac, ibuprofen, and nabumetone). The major outcome measure was the combined end point used by the Antiplatelet Trialists' Collaboration, which includes CV, hemorrhagic, and unknown deaths; nonfatal myocardial infarctions; and nonfatal strokes. More than 28 000 patients, representing >14 000 patient-years at risk, were analyzed. The relative risk for an end point was 0.84 (95% CI: 0.51, 1.38) when comparing rofecoxib with placebo; 0.79 (95% CI: 0.40, 1.55) when comparing rofecoxib with non-naproxen NSAIDs; and 1.69 (95% CI: 1.07, 2.69) when comparing rofecoxib with naproxen. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis provides no evidence for an excess of CV events for rofecoxib relative to either placebo or the non-naproxen NSAIDs that were studied. Differences observed between rofecoxib and naproxen are likely the result of the antiplatelet effects of the latter agent.

Aged↗

Predictive factors and a corresponding treatment algorithm for controlled ovarian stimulation in patients treated with recombinant human follicle stimulating hormone (follitropin alfa) during assisted reproduction technology (ART) procedures. An analysis of 1378 patients.

BACKGROUND: Identifying parameters that can accurately predict the response to controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) would be of great benefit in assisted reproductive technology (ART) procedures. An analysis was undertaken with the objective of determining whether specific factors could optimally predict a response to stimulation in ART, and to then develop a corresponding treatment algorithm that could be used to calculate the optimal starting dose of recombinant human follicle stimulating hormone (r-hFSH; follitropin alfa) for selected patients. METHODS: The overall population consisted of 2280 normo-ovulatory ART patients from 11 randomised clinical trials. However, for the final analysis population, only patients less than 35 years of age who received r-hFSH monotherapy (N = 1378) were included. RESULTS: Backwards stepwise regression modelling indicated that predictive factors for ovarian response included basal FSH, BMI, age and number of follicles < 11 mm at baseline screening. The concordance probability index was 59.5% for this model. CONCLUSIONS: In the largest data series so far analysed to determine predictive factors of ovarian response, basal FSH, BMI, age and number of follicles < 11 mm at screening were the most important variables in ART patients less than 35 years of age who were treated with r-hFSH monotherapy. Using these four predictive factors, a follitropin alfa starting dose calculator was developed that can be used to select the FSH starting dose required for an optimal response. The relevance of this dose calculator will be evaluated in a prospective clinical trial.

Adolescent↗

Clinical trials.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Clinical Protocols↗

The epidemiology of severe sepsis syndrome and its treatment with recombinant human activated protein C.

Severe sepsis syndrome has important consequences to healthcare systems as the incidence is increasing, there is significant attributed morbidity and mortality and there is a substantial cost for in-hospital and post-discharge care. Current treatment includes the use of antimicrobials, local source control and aggressive physiological support, usually in an intensive care unit setting. Drotrecogin-alpha (activated) or recombinant human activated protein C (rhAPC) is the only biological agent approved for use in severe sepsis syndrome that has demonstrated efficacy in reducing 28-day all-cause mortality and new data suggests a trend towards longer term survival. However, given the evidence of a variable effect on survival rates in patient subgroups and its acquisition cost, controversy has arisen concerning its appropriate use. This review discusses the epidemiology of sepsis, preclinical and clinical evidence supporting the use of rhAPC use, controversies about the evidence of efficacy in severe sepsis syndrome and cost-effectiveness data.

Anti-Infective Agents↗

[Tolerance and safety of tramadol use. Results of international studies and data from drug surveillance].

This article presents a summary of drug safety data concerning the use of tramadol hydrochloride and an outline of the specific aspects of this analgesic in particular with regard to respiratory depression and dependence potential. Information from phase II to IV clinical studies, postmarketing surveillance studies (covering safety data from a total of more than 21,000 patients) and the spontaneous reporting system have been taken into consideration. The data from the spontaneous reporting system covers the period between 1977 and 1993, during which more than one billion single dose units were distributed throughout the world. The phase II to IV studies compare acute intravenous, acute intramuscular, acute oral and multiple dose oral administration Postmarketing surveillance studies provide a picture of everyday use of tramadol in general medical practice. Further analyses were performed to provide information about the gender-, age- and dose-related distribution of adverse reactions The prevalence of side effects was calculated by comparing the number of symptoms with the number of patients. The pooled data from the clinical studies and the postmarketing surveillance studies reveal that the most commonly observed side effects were nausea, dizziness, drowsiness, tiredness, sweating, vomiting and dry mouth, with an overall incidence of between 1 and 6%. In the postmarketing surveillance studies on long term and acute administration, the profile of adverse events was qualitatively almost identical to that in the phase II to IV studies. However, there were distinct quantitative differences it favour of the long term studies. In the postmarketing surveillance study on acute parenteral administration, the incidences of nausea and vomiting were only 4.2 and 0.5% respectively, which is significantly lower than the 20.7 and 11.4% in the patient-controlled analgesia studies. Nevertheless, it is important to take into consideration the different conditions in these studies. All the postmarketing surveillance studies were outpatient studies, whereas almost all of the phase II to IV studies were carried out in hospitals. The studies with intravenous and intramuscular administration were mainly postoperative, which explains the relatively high incidence of nausea and vomiting, 17.8 and 7.0%, respectively, with intramuscular administration. The different conditions in the phase II to IV studies and the postmarketing surveillance studies are also reflected in the occurrence of dizziness and postural hypotension: The incidence of dizziness in the postmarketing surveillance studies is slightly higher than that observed in the phase II to IV studies. Particularly in the studies with intravenous and intramuscular administration, the patients were confined to bed and were therefore much less sensitive to dizziness than those in the long term oral and postmarketing surveillance studies, who were all outpatients. On the other hand, postural hypotension played almost no role in the multiple dose studies, in which the oral formulation were used most frequently. It is interesting to note that diarrhoea, pruritus and gastrointestinal disorder (except nausea and vomiting) are mainly reported in the multiple dose studies in the groups receiving oral tramadol, and also in the postmarketing surveillance studies. Once again, the study conditions may well be the explanation. The adverse effects reported in both clinical and postmarketing surveillance studies are similar to those in the spontaneous reports. The most frequently documented adverse effects in clinical and postmarketing surveillance studies, i.e. nausea/vomiting, dizziness, drowsiness, tiredness, sweating and dry mouth, are noted very infrequently in spontaneous reports, since in medical practice these side effects are usually known and are described in the product information. Almost all reports referring to abuse/dependence are connected with pain therapy; they give no reason to suspect any pro

Analgesics, Opioid↗