Journal of Clinical Oncology, 2009 ASCO Annual Meeting Proceedings (Post-Meeting Edition).
Vol 27, No 18S (June 20 Supplement), 2009: CRA6509
© 2009 American Society of Clinical Oncology

This Article Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Download to citation manager Rights & Permissions Google Scholar Articles by Cheng, S. Articles by Dilts, D. PubMed Articles by Cheng, S. Articles by Dilts, D.

Abstract

A sense of urgency: Evaluating the link between clinical trial development time and the accrual performance of CTEP-sponsored studies

Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN; National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN

CRA6509

Background: Post-activation barriers to oncology clinical trial accruals are well documented; however, potential barriers prior to trial opening are not. We investigate one such barrier: trial development time. Methods: National Cancer Institute Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program (NCI-CTEP) sponsored trials for all therapeutic, non-pediatric phase I,I/II, II, and III studies activated in an eight year period (2000–2007) were investigated (n=553). Successful trials were those achieving 100% of minimum accrual goal. Time to open a study was the calendar time from initial CTEP submission to trialactivation. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used tocalculate unadjusted and adjusted odds ratios, controlling for study phase and size of expected accruals. Results: 40.0 percent (n=221) of CTEP-approved oncology trials failed to achieve minimum accrual goals, with 49.2 percent (n=30) of phase III trials failing to achieve at least 25 percent of accrual goals. A total of 8,723 patients (17.0% of accruals) accrued to those studies that were unable to achieve the projected minimum accrual goal. Trials requiring 9–12 months development were significantly more likely to achieve accrual goals (odds ratio, 1.94; 95% CI, 1.06 to 3.52, P=0.031) than trials requiring the median time (15–18 months); trials that exceeded 27 months of development time were significantly less likely of achieving accrual goals (odds ratio, 0.14; 95% CI, 0.04 to 0.54, P=0.004). Conclusions: A large percentage of oncology clinical trials do not achieve minimum projected accruals. Trial development time appears to be one important predictor of the likelihood of successfully achieving the minimum accrual goals.

Abstract presentation from the 2009 ASCO Annual Meeting