Journal Mobile Options
Table of Contents
Vol. 96, No. 3, 2012
Issue release date: November 2012
Section title: Original Paper
Neuroendocrinology 2012;96:238–248
(DOI:10.1159/000337662)

Quality of Clinical Trials in Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumours

Walter T.a, c · Krzyzanowska M.K.a, b
aDepartment of Medical Oncology and Hematology, Princess Margaret Hospital, and bDepartment of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ont., Canada; cHospices Civils de Lyon, Hôpital Edouard Herriot, Fédération des Spécialités Digestives, Lyon, France
email Corresponding Author

Monika K. Krzyzanowska

Department of Medical Oncology and Hematology

Princess Margaret Hospital, 610 University Ave, Suite 5-206

Toronto, ON M5G 2M9 (Canada)

Tel. +1 416 946 6542, E-Mail monika.krzyzanowska@uhn.on.ca

Do you have an account?

Register and profit from personalized services (MyKarger) Login Information

Please create your User ID & Password





Contact Information









I have read the Karger Terms and Conditions and agree.



Abstract

Background: The heterogeneity of neuroendocrine tumours (NETs) makes interpretation of clinical trials in this disease challenging. Our aim was to review the quality of treatment trials in NETs in order to inform the design and reporting of future studies. Methods: We identified studies by searching MEDLINE. We considered all phase II and III trials of systemic antineoplastic treatments published between 2000 and 2011. Information on trial design, study population, end points, statistical considerations and results was abstracted from each article using a standardized form. Results: Seven phase III and 39 phase II trials were identified. The make-up of the study population was variable: only 24% of trials included patients with one type of tumour (pancreatic NET or carcinoid tumour), 41% included patients with both tumour types, and 35% of trials included other endocrine cancers. Disease progression at baseline was often not reported and was documented for all patients in 22% of the trials. The functional status of the tumour, tumour differentiation, and Ki67 index were reported in 35, 43, and 15% of trials, respectively. The primary end point was clearly defined in 72% of trials. Identifiable statistical design, and predefined sample size were reported in 74 and 61% of trials, respectively. Conflicts of interest and study sponsorship were reported in 46 and 85% of trials. Conclusions: The quality of the design and reporting of phase II/III NET trials, as described in other cancers, is poor. Future trials should include more homogenous patient populations while adhering to rigorous selection, reporting and interpretation of population and trial parameters.

© 2012 S. Karger AG, Basel


Article / Publication Details

First-Page Preview
Abstract of Original Paper

Received: 11/2/2011 10:03:32 AM
Accepted: 2/28/2012
Published online: 8/28/2012

Number of Print Pages: 11
Number of Figures: 1
Number of Tables: 5

ISSN: 0028-3835 (Print)
eISSN: 1423-0194 (Online)

For additional information: http://www.karger.com/NEN


Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer

Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher or, in the case of photocopying, direct payment of a specified fee to the Copyright Clearance Center.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.