%0 Journal Article %1 Angus2019 %A Angus, Derek C. %A Alexander, Brian M. %A Berry, Scott %A Buxton, Meredith %A Lewis, Roger %A Paoloni, Melissa %A Webb, Steven A.R. %A Arnold, Steven %A Barker, Anna %A Berry, Donald A. %A Bonten, Marc J.M. %A Brophy, Mary %A Butler, Christopher %A Cloughesy, Timothy F. %A Derde, Lennie P.G. %A Esserman, Laura J. %A Ferguson, Ryan %A Fiore, Louis %A Gaffey, Sarah C. %A Gaziano, J. Michael %A Giusti, Kathy %A Goossens, Herman %A Heritier, Stephane %A Hyman, Bradley %A Krams, Michael %A Larholt, Kay %A LaVange, Lisa M. %A Lavori, Philip %A Lo, Andrew W. %A London, Alex John %A Manax, Victoria %A McArthur, Colin %A O’Neill, Genevieve %A Parmigiani, Giovanni %A Perlmutter, Jane %A Petzold, Elizabeth A. %A Ritchie, Craig %A Rowan, Kathryn M. %A Seymour, Christopher W. %A Shapiro, Nathan I. %A Simeone, Diane M. %A Smith, Bradley %A Spellberg, Bradley %A Stern, Ariel Dora %A Trippa, Lorenzo %A Trusheim, Mark %A Viele, Kert %A Wen, Patrick Y. %A Woodcock, Janet %D 2019 %I Nat Rev Drug Discov %J Nature reviews. Drug discovery %K imported %N 10 %P 797-807 %R 10.1038/S41573-019-0034-3 %T Adaptive platform trials: definition, design, conduct and reporting considerations %U https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31462747/ %V 18 %X Researchers, clinicians, policymakers and patients are increasingly interested in questions about therapeutic interventions that are difficult or costly to answer with traditional, free-standing, parallel-group randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Examples include scenarios in which there is a desire to compare multiple interventions, to generate separate effect estimates across subgroups of patients with distinct but related conditions or clinical features, or to minimize downtime between trials. In response, researchers have proposed new RCT designs such as adaptive platform trials (APTs), which are able to study multiple interventions in a disease or condition in a perpetual manner, with interventions entering and leaving the platform on the basis of a predefined decision algorithm. APTs offer innovations that could reshape clinical trials, and several APTs are now funded in various disease areas. With the aim of facilitating the use of APTs, here we review common features and issues that arise with such trials, and offer recommendations to promote best practices in their design, conduct, oversight and reporting.

@article{Angus2019, abstract = {Researchers, clinicians, policymakers and patients are increasingly interested in questions about therapeutic interventions that are difficult or costly to answer with traditional, free-standing, parallel-group randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Examples include scenarios in which there is a desire to compare multiple interventions, to generate separate effect estimates across subgroups of patients with distinct but related conditions or clinical features, or to minimize downtime between trials. In response, researchers have proposed new RCT designs such as adaptive platform trials (APTs), which are able to study multiple interventions in a disease or condition in a perpetual manner, with interventions entering and leaving the platform on the basis of a predefined decision algorithm. APTs offer innovations that could reshape clinical trials, and several APTs are now funded in various disease areas. With the aim of facilitating the use of APTs, here we review common features and issues that arise with such trials, and offer recommendations to promote best practices in their design, conduct, oversight and reporting.}, added-at = {2023-02-03T11:44:35.000+0100}, author = {Angus, Derek C. and Alexander, Brian M. and Berry, Scott and Buxton, Meredith and Lewis, Roger and Paoloni, Melissa and Webb, Steven A.R. and Arnold, Steven and Barker, Anna and Berry, Donald A. and Bonten, Marc J.M. and Brophy, Mary and Butler, Christopher and Cloughesy, Timothy F. and Derde, Lennie P.G. and Esserman, Laura J. and Ferguson, Ryan and Fiore, Louis and Gaffey, Sarah C. and Gaziano, J. Michael and Giusti, Kathy and Goossens, Herman and Heritier, Stephane and Hyman, Bradley and Krams, Michael and Larholt, Kay and LaVange, Lisa M. and Lavori, Philip and Lo, Andrew W. and London, Alex John and Manax, Victoria and McArthur, Colin and O’Neill, Genevieve and Parmigiani, Giovanni and Perlmutter, Jane and Petzold, Elizabeth A. and Ritchie, Craig and Rowan, Kathryn M. and Seymour, Christopher W. and Shapiro, Nathan I. and Simeone, Diane M. and Smith, Bradley and Spellberg, Bradley and Stern, Ariel Dora and Trippa, Lorenzo and Trusheim, Mark and Viele, Kert and Wen, Patrick Y. and Woodcock, Janet}, biburl = {https://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2cb4828bbcc69f8e3b306af7b45322061/jepcastel}, doi = {10.1038/S41573-019-0034-3}, interhash = {5157a759dbe7c1d5dd89483d9440cc5a}, intrahash = {cb4828bbcc69f8e3b306af7b45322061}, issn = {1474-1784}, journal = {Nature reviews. Drug discovery}, keywords = {imported}, month = {10}, note = {Disseny; Dissenys adaptatius; Platform trials; Exemples}, number = 10, pages = {797-807}, pmid = {31462747}, publisher = {Nat Rev Drug Discov}, timestamp = {2023-02-03T11:44:35.000+0100}, title = {Adaptive platform trials: definition, design, conduct and reporting considerations}, url = {https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31462747/}, volume = 18, year = 2019 }