Enhancing reporting quality and impact of early phase dose-finding clinical trials: CONSORT Dose-finding Extension (CONSORT-DEFINE) guidance.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Yap C
PROVIDER: S-EPMC10583500 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Oct
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Enhancing reporting quality and impact of early phase dose-finding clinical trials: CONSORT Dose-finding Extension (CONSORT-DEFINE) guidance.
Yap Christina C Solovyeva Olga O de Bono Johann J Rekowski Jan J Patel Dhrusti D Jaki Thomas T Mander Adrian A Evans Thomas R Jeffry TRJ Peck Richard R Hayward Kathryn S KS Hopewell Sally S Ursino Moreno M Rantell Khadija Rerhou KR Calvert Melanie M Lee Shing S Kightley Andrew A Ashby Deborah D Chan An-Wen AW Garrett-Mayer Elizabeth E Isaacs John D JD Golub Robert R Kholmanskikh Olga O Richards Dawn D Boix Oliver O Matcham James J Seymour Lesley L Ivy S Percy SP Marshall Lynley V LV Hommais Antoine A Liu Rong R Tanaka Yoshiya Y Berlin Jordan J Espinasse Aude A Dimairo Munyaradzi M Weir Christopher J CJ
BMJ (Clinical research ed.) 20231020
Similar Datasets
Project description:Early phase dose-finding (EPDF) trials are key in the development of novel therapies, with their findings directly informing subsequent clinical development phases and providing valuable insights for reverse translation. Comprehensive and transparent reporting of these studies is critical for their accurate and critical interpretation, which may improve and expedite therapeutic development. However, quality of reporting of design characteristics and results from EPDF trials is often variable and incomplete. The international consensus-based CONSORT-DEFINE (Consolidated Standards for Reporting Trials Dose-finding Extension) statement, an extension of the CONSORT statement for randomised trials, was developed to improve the reporting of EPDF trials. The CONSORT-DEFINE statement introduced 21 new items and modified 19 existing CONSORT items.This CONSORT-DEFINE Explanation and Elaboration (E&E) document provides important information to enhance understanding and facilitate the implementation of the CONSORT-DEFINE checklist. For each new or modified checklist item, we provide a detailed description and its rationale with supporting evidence, and present examples from EPDF trial reports published in peer-reviewed scientific journals. When reporting the results of EPDF trials, authors are encouraged to consult the CONSORT-DEFINE E&E document, together with the CONSORT and CONSORT-DEFINE statement papers, and adhere to their recommendations. Widespread adoption of the CONSORT-DEFINE statement is likely to enhance the reporting quality of EPDF trials, thus facilitating the peer review of such studies and their appraisal by researchers, regulators, ethics committee members, and funders.FundingThis work is a further extension of the CONSORT-DEFINE study, which was funded by the UK Medical Research Council (MRC)-National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Methodology Research Programme (MR/T044934/1). The Clinical Trials and Statistics Unit at The Institute of Cancer Research (ICR-CTSU) receives programmatic infrastructure funding from Cancer Research UK (C1491/A25351; CTUQQR-Dec 22/100 004), which has contributed to accelerating the advancement and successful completion of this work.
| S-EPMC11773258 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionEarly phase dose-finding (EPDF) studies are critical for the development of new treatments, directly influencing whether compounds or interventions can be investigated in further trials to confirm their safety and efficacy. There exists guidance for clinical trial protocols and reporting of completed trials in the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) 2013 and CONsolidated Standards Of Reporting Randomised Trials (CONSORT) 2010 statements. However, neither the original statements nor their extensions adequately cover the specific features of EPDF trials. The DEFINE (DosE-FIndiNg Extensions) study aims to enhance transparency, completeness, reproducibility and interpretation of EPDF trial protocols (SPIRIT-DEFINE) and their reports once completed (CONSORT-DEFINE), across all disease areas, building on the original SPIRIT 2013 and CONSORT 2010 statements.Methods and analysisA methodological review of published EPDF trials will be conducted to identify features and deficiencies in reporting and inform the initial generation of the candidate items. The early draft checklists will be enriched through a review of published and grey literature, real-world examples analysis, citation and reference searches and consultation with international experts, including regulators and journal editors. Development of CONSORT-DEFINE commenced in March 2021, followed by SPIRIT-DEFINE from January 2022. A modified Delphi process, involving worldwide, multidisciplinary and cross-sector key stakeholders, will be run to refine the checklists. An international consensus meeting in autumn 2022 will finalise the list of items to be included in both guidance extensions.Ethics and disseminationThis project was approved by ICR's Committee for Clinical Research. The Health Research Authority confirmed Research Ethics Approval is not required. The dissemination strategy aims to maximise guideline awareness and uptake, including but not limited to dissemination in stakeholder meetings, conferences, peer-reviewed publications and on the EQUATOR Network and DEFINE study websites.Registration detailsSPIRIT-DEFINE and CONSORT-DEFINE are registered with the EQUATOR Network.
| S-EPMC10069529 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundEarly phase dose-finding (EPDF) trials are crucial for the development of a new intervention and influence whether it should be investigated in further trials. Guidance exists for clinical trial protocols and completed trial reports in the SPIRIT and CONSORT guidelines, respectively. However, both guidelines and their extensions do not adequately address the characteristics of EPDF trials. Building on the SPIRIT and CONSORT checklists, the DEFINE study aims to develop international consensus-driven guidelines for EPDF trial protocols (SPIRIT-DEFINE) and reports (CONSORT-DEFINE).MethodsThe initial generation of candidate items was informed by reviewing published EPDF trial reports. The early draft items were refined further through a review of the published and grey literature, analysis of real-world examples, citation and reference searches, and expert recommendations, followed by a two-round modified Delphi process. Patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) was pursued concurrently with the quantitative and thematic analysis of Delphi participants' feedback.ResultsThe Delphi survey included 79 new or modified SPIRIT-DEFINE (n = 36) and CONSORT-DEFINE (n = 43) extension candidate items. In Round One, 206 interdisciplinary stakeholders from 24 countries voted and 151 stakeholders voted in Round Two. Following Round One feedback, one item for CONSORT-DEFINE was added in Round Two. Of the 80 items, 60 met the threshold for inclusion (≥ 70% of respondents voted critical: 26 SPIRIT-DEFINE, 34 CONSORT-DEFINE), with the remaining 20 items to be further discussed at the consensus meeting. The parallel PPIE work resulted in the development of an EPDF lay summary toolkit consisting of a template with guidance notes and an exemplar.ConclusionsBy detailing the development journey of the DEFINE study and the decisions undertaken, we envision that this will enhance understanding and help researchers in the development of future guidelines. The SPIRIT-DEFINE and CONSORT-DEFINE guidelines will allow investigators to effectively address essential items that should be present in EPDF trial protocols and reports, thereby promoting transparency, comprehensiveness, and reproducibility.Trial registrationSPIRIT-DEFINE and CONSORT-DEFINE are registered with the EQUATOR Network ( https://www.equator-network.org/ ).
| S-EPMC10324137 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Transparent and accurate reporting in early phase dose-finding (EPDF) clinical trials is crucial for informing subsequent larger trials. The SPIRIT statement, designed for trial protocol content, does not adequately cover the distinctive features of EPDF trials. Recent findings indicate that the protocol contents in past EPDF trials frequently lacked completeness and clarity. To address this gap, the international consensus-driven SPIRIT-DEFINE checklist was developed through a robust methodological framework for guideline development, with the aim to improve completeness and clarity in EPDF trial protocols. The checklist builds on the SPIRIT statement, adding 17 new items and modifying 15 existing ones.The SPIRIT-DEFINE explanation and elaboration (E&E) document provides comprehensive information to enhance understanding and usability of the SPIRIT-DEFINE checklist when writing an EPDF trial protocol. Each new or modified checklist item is accompanied by a detailed description, its rationale with supportive evidence, and examples of good reporting curated from EPDF trial protocols covering a range of therapeutic areas and interventions. We recommend utilising this paper alongside the SPIRIT statement, and any relevant extensions, to enhance the development and review of EPDF trial protocols.By facilitating adoption of the SPIRIT-DEFINE statement for EPDF trials, this E&E document can promote enhancement of methodological rigour, patient safety, transparency, and facilitate the generation of high-quality, reproducible evidence that will strengthen the foundation of early phase research and ultimately improve patient outcomes.FundingThis work is a further extension of the SPIRIT-DEFINE study, which obtained no external funding. The principal investigator (CY) used internal staff resources, together with additional resources from external partners, to conduct this study. The SPIRIT-DEFINE study is a component of the DEFINE project, which also developed the MRC/NIHR funded CONSORT-DEFINE guidance. ICR-CTSU receives programmatic infrastructure funding from Cancer Research UK (C1491/A25351; CTUQQR-Dec22/100004), which has contributed to accelerating the advancement and successful completion of this work.
| S-EPMC11773215 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceTransparent reporting of randomized trials is essential to facilitate critical appraisal and interpretation of results. Factorial trials, in which 2 or more interventions are assessed in the same set of participants, have unique methodological considerations. However, reporting of factorial trials is suboptimal.ObjectiveTo develop a consensus-based extension to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) 2010 Statement for factorial trials.DesignUsing the Enhancing the Quality and Transparency of Health Research (EQUATOR) methodological framework, the CONSORT extension for factorial trials was developed by (1) generating a list of reporting recommendations for factorial trials using a scoping review of methodological articles identified using a MEDLINE search (from inception to May 2019) and supplemented with relevant articles from the personal collections of the authors; (2) a 3-round Delphi survey between January and June 2022 to identify additional items and assess the importance of each item, completed by 104 panelists from 14 countries; and (3) a hybrid consensus meeting attended by 15 panelists to finalize the selection and wording of items for the checklist.FindingsThis CONSORT extension for factorial trials modifies 16 of the 37 items in the CONSORT 2010 checklist and adds 1 new item. The rationale for the importance of each item is provided. Key recommendations are (1) the reason for using a factorial design should be reported, including whether an interaction is hypothesized, (2) the treatment groups that form the main comparisons should be clearly identified, and (3) for each main comparison, the estimated interaction effect and its precision should be reported.Conclusions and relevanceThis extension of the CONSORT 2010 Statement provides guidance on the reporting of factorial randomized trials and should facilitate greater understanding of and transparency in their reporting.
| S-EPMC7617336 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This review of reviews aimed to appraise the use of the CONSORT-PRO Extension as an evaluation tool for assessing the reporting of patient-reported outcome (PROs) in publications, and to describe the reporting of PRO research across reviews. We also outlined how variation in such evaluations impacts knowledge translation and may lead to potential misuse of the CONSORT-PRO Extension. We systematically searched Medline, Pubmed and CINAHL from 2013 to 2025 March 2021 for reviews of the completeness of reporting of PRO endpoints according to CONSORT-PRO criteria. Two reviewers extracted details of each review, the percentage of included studies that addressed each CONSORT-PRO item, and key recommendations from each review. Fourteen reviews met inclusion criteria, and only six of these used the full CONSORT-PRO checklist with minimal justified modifications. The remaining eight studies made significant or unjustified adjustments to the CONSORT-PRO Extension. Review studies also varied in how they scored multi-component CONSORT-PRO items. CONSORT-PRO items were often unreported in trial reports, and certain CONSORT-PRO items were reported less often than others. The reporting of statistical approaches to dealing with missing PRO data were poor in RCTs included in all 14 review articles. Studies reviewing PRO publications often omitted recommended CONSORT-PRO items from their evaluations, which may cause confusion among readers regarding how best to report their PRO research according to the CONSORT-PRO extension. Many trials published since CONSORT-PRO's release did not report recommended CONSORT-PRO items, which may lead to misinterpretation and consequently to research waste.
| S-EPMC9470606 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundRandomised controlled trials (RCTs) are used to evaluate social and psychological interventions and inform policy decisions about them. Accurate, complete, and transparent reports of social and psychological intervention RCTs are essential for understanding their design, conduct, results, and the implications of the findings. However, the reporting of RCTs of social and psychological interventions remains suboptimal. The CONSORT Statement has improved the reporting of RCTs in biomedicine. A similar high-quality guideline is needed for the behavioural and social sciences. Our objective was to develop an official extension of the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials 2010 Statement (CONSORT 2010) for reporting RCTs of social and psychological interventions: CONSORT-SPI 2018.MethodsWe followed best practices in developing the reporting guideline extension. First, we conducted a systematic review of existing reporting guidelines. We then conducted an online Delphi process including 384 international participants. In March 2014, we held a 3-day consensus meeting of 31 experts to determine the content of a checklist specifically targeting social and psychological intervention RCTs. Experts discussed previous research and methodological issues of particular relevance to social and psychological intervention RCTs. They then voted on proposed modifications or extensions of items from CONSORT 2010.ResultsThe CONSORT-SPI 2018 checklist extends 9 of the 25 items from CONSORT 2010: background and objectives, trial design, participants, interventions, statistical methods, participant flow, baseline data, outcomes and estimation, and funding. In addition, participants added a new item related to stakeholder involvement, and they modified aspects of the flow diagram related to participant recruitment and retention.ConclusionsAuthors should use CONSORT-SPI 2018 to improve reporting of their social and psychological intervention RCTs. Journals should revise editorial policies and procedures to require use of reporting guidelines by authors and peer reviewers to produce manuscripts that allow readers to appraise study quality, evaluate the applicability of findings to their contexts, and replicate effective interventions.
| S-EPMC6066921 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) Statement was developed to help biomedical researchers report randomised controlled trials (RCTs) transparently. We have developed an extension to the CONSORT 2010 Statement for social and psychological interventions (CONSORT-SPI 2018) to help behavioural and social scientists report these studies transparently.MethodsFollowing a systematic review of existing reporting guidelines, we conducted an online Delphi process to prioritise the list of potential items for the CONSORT-SPI 2018 checklist identified from the systematic review. Of 384 international participants, 321 (84%) participated in both rating rounds. We then held a consensus meeting of 31 scientists, journal editors, and research funders (March 2014) to finalise the content of the CONSORT-SPI 2018 checklist and flow diagram.ResultsCONSORT-SPI 2018 extends 9 items (14 including sub-items) from the CONSORT 2010 checklist, adds a new item (with 3 sub-items) related to stakeholder involvement in trials, and modifies the CONSORT 2010 flow diagram. This Explanation and Elaboration (E&E) document is a user manual to enhance understanding of CONSORT-SPI 2018. It discusses the meaning and rationale for each checklist item and provides examples of complete and transparent reporting.ConclusionsThe CONSORT-SPI 2018 Extension, this E&E document, and the CONSORT website ( www.consort-statement.org ) are helpful resources for improving the reporting of social and psychological intervention RCTs.
| S-EPMC6066913 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Introduction: In recent years, there has been a growing trend among regulatory agencies to consider the use of historical controls in clinical trials as a means of improving the efficiency of trial design. In this paper, to enhance the statistical operating characteristic of Phase I dose-finding trials, we propose a novel model-assisted design method named "MEM-Keyboard". Methods: The proposed design is based on the multisource exchangeability models (MEMs) that allows for dynamic borrowing of information from multiple supplemental data sources, including historical trial data, to inform the dose-escalation process. Furthermore, with the frequent occurrence of delayed toxicity in novel anti-cancer drugs, we extended our proposed method to handle late-onset toxicity by incorporating historical data. This extended method is referred to as "MEM-TITE-Keyboard" and aims to improve the efficiency of early clinical trials. Results: Simulation studies have indicated that the proposed methods can improve the probability of correctly selecting the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) with an acceptable level of risk, compared to designs that do not account for information borrowing and late-onset toxicity. Discussion: The MEM-Keyboard and MEM-TITE-Keyboard, easy to implement in practice, provide a useful tool for identifying MTD and accelerating drug development.
| S-EPMC10703472 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8082311 | biostudies-literature