Dataset Information

Landscape of phase 1 clinical trials for minors with cancer in the United States.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

Understanding trends in characteristics of early phase trials that allow minors with cancer to participate may inform additional efforts to improve cancer drug development for young people.

Methods

We accessed data for oncology phase 1 or phase 1/2 trials in the United States from ClinicalTrials.gov with lower age bound for eligibility <18 years. Descriptive statistics were calculated and trends over time evaluated using logistic and multinomial logistic regression.

Results

Six hundred twelve trials met inclusion criteria. Sixty-five percent of trials were for older adults that also allowed minors, while 9% were exclusively for patients ≤18 years of age. Eighty-three percent of trials included at least one novel agent, while 17% studied only conventional therapies. Fifty-eight percent of trials studied treatments not yet Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved (48% if exclusively for patients ≤18 years). Fifteen percent of trials for which dose-escalation method could be determined, utilized a model-based design. Eighteen percent of all trials were industry sponsored (48% if exclusively for patients ≤18 years). Forty-nine percent of all trials were multicenter (69% if exclusively for patients ≤18 years). There was an increase in trials exclusively focused on patients with central nervous system (CNS) tumors over the study period (P ≤ .02). No other temporal trends were seen. The median times from first-in-adult to first-in-pediatric for monotherapy and combination trials were 5.7 and 3.3 years, respectively.

Conclusion

The paucity of clear temporal trends highlights the need for innovation in early drug development for young people. Our analysis serves as a benchmark against which to evaluate initiatives to improve pediatric cancer drug development.

SUBMITTER: Nader JH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7896417 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:To ensure generalizability of clinical research results, it is important to enroll a heterogeneous population that is representative of the target clinical population. Earlier studies have found regional variation in participation in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) clinical trials, with the lowest rates seen in the southern United States. Rates of new HIV diagnoses are highest in the South, highlighting the need for in-depth understanding of disparities in clinical trial participation. We evaluated whether regional variation in study participation remains, and describe factors that facilitate or prevent HIV clinical trial participation by region.A one-time, anonymous, bilingual, self-administered survey was conducted among HIV-infected adults receiving HIV care at all 47 domestic AIDS Clinical Trials Group clinical research sites, with a goal of completing 50 surveys per site. ?(2) tests were used to evaluate differences in knowledge of and participation in HIV clinical trials by region, including Northeast, Midwest, South, and West regions. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the effect of region on knowledge of and participation in HIV clinical trials.Of 2263 completed surveys, 2125 were included in this analysis. The proportion of respondents in the South who reported knowledge of studies (66%) was significantly lower than in the Northeast (76%), Midwest (77%), and West (73%) (P = 0.001). Respondents in the South also were the least likely group to report ever having tried to or having participated in a research study (51%) compared with respondents in the Northeast (60%), Midwest (57%), and West (69%; P < 0.001). After adjusting for age, sex, education, race/ethnicity, tobacco use, and alcohol use, the odds ratio for knowledge of and participation in clinical trials for the Northeast (1.36; 95% CI 1.07-1.72) and West (1.85; 95% CI 1.39-2.45) remained significant compared with the South. African American respondents in the South were the most likely population group to report not understanding research studies (15%) as a reason for not participating, compared with the Northeast (9%), Midwest (8%), and West (6%; P < 0.001).Significant regional variations in knowledge of and participation in HIV clinical trials exist. Our results suggest that increasing awareness and understanding of research studies, particularly among African Americans in the South, may facilitate HIV clinical trial participation that is more representative of the HIV-infected population across the United States.