Study finds no significant survival benefit from participating in cancer clinical trials

  • 📰 NewsMedical
  • ⏱ Reading Time:
  • 84 sec. here
  • 5 min. at publisher
  • 📊 Quality Score:
  • News: 44%
  • Publisher: 71%

Cancer News

Clinical Trial,Drugs

Participation in cancer clinical trials often suggests improved survival rates, but high-quality studies accounting for biases show no significant survival benefit. Trial benefits may be overstated due to confounding factors.

By Pooja Toshniwal PahariaMay 23 2024Reviewed by Benedette Cuffari, M.Sc. In a recent study published in JAMA, researchers determined whether patient involvement in cancer trials is associated with improved survival rates compared to regular therapy.

Cancer trial reviews from the 1990s have reported inconsistent evidence that patient involvement improves survival rates. Likewise, systematic literature reviews in different illness categories have not indicated that individuals participating in clinical trials had improved outcomes as compared to those receiving standard care.

The treatment effect was defined as the effect of participating in trials on study outcomes regulated by intervention allocation. The participation effect was that of clinical trial participation unmediated by allotment to the intervention. Combining both treatment and participation effects yielded trial effects, which comprised differences in outcomes between regular care recipients and trial participants as measured by trial participation.

Studies using HRs to compare overall survival between the trial participant group and those receiving standard care and trials that treated cancer patients with pharmacological or biologic therapy were also included in the analysis. Studies that investigated indirect interventions or surgical procedures, letters, editorials, comments, and studies published in languages other than English were excluded from the analysis.

Study findings Initially, the researchers identified 12,791 records, 3,094 of which were duplicates, and 9,523 that were excluded after title-abstract screening. After applying eligibility criteria, the researchers analyzed 39 studies, which included 85 comparisons between standard care recipients and trial participants. The median sample sizes for the trial participant and standard care patient groups were 209 and 409, respectively.

 

Thank you for your comment. Your comment will be published after being reviewed.
Please try again later.
We have summarized this news so that you can read it quickly. If you are interested in the news, you can read the full text here. Read more:

 /  🏆 19. in LAW

Law Law Latest News, Law Law Headlines

Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.

Trump hush money trial latest: Trump fined over social media posts as hush money trial restartsDonald Trump is back in court for his hush money trial, the first criminal case against a former US president. It is one of multiple legal issues for Trump, who also found himself at the centre of a Supreme Court hearing last week.
Source: SkyNews - 🏆 35. / 67 Read more »