Journal-based CME Course: Externally Controlled Studies Using Real-World Data in Patients With Hematological Cancers – A Systematic Review

Activity ID

13564

Expires

August 29, 2027

Format Type

Journal-based

CME Credit

1

Fee

$30

CME Provider: JAMA Oncology

Description of CME Course

Importance  The use of real-world data (RWD) external control arms in prospective studies is increasing. The advantages, including the immediate availability of a control population, must be balanced with the requirements of meeting evidentiary standards.

Objective  To address the question of whether and to what extent the methods of RWD studies compare to standard methods used in randomized clinical trials.

Evidence Review  A systematic search across 4 electronic databases and Google Scholar was conducted from January 1, 2000, to October 23, 2023. Studies were included in the systematic review if they compared an intervention arm in a clinical trial to an RWD control arm in patients with hematological cancers and if they were published between 2000 and 2023.

Findings  Thirty-two prospective intervention studies incorporating external control data from RWD sources of patients with hematological cancers were identified. A total of 4306 patients from intervention arms and 10 594 from RWD control arms were included across all studies. Only 2 studies (6%) included prospectively collected RWD. The complete trial inclusion criteria were applied to the RWD cohort in 7 studies (22%). Four studies (13%) published the statistical analysis plan and prespecified use of RWD. A total of 23 studies (72%) applied matching algorithms for trial and RWD cohorts, including matching for demographic, disease, and/or therapy-related characteristics. The end point criteria were the same as the trial in 8 studies (25%). In contrast, 12 studies (38%) used different end points, and 12 (38%) did not provide an end point definition for the RWD. Twelve studies (38%) had a median follow-up difference of less than a year between arms. Eight studies (25%) reported toxic effect data for the trial arm, of which 5 studies reported toxic effect data for the RWD arm.

Conclusions and Relevance  In this systematic review, limitations were observed in the application of clinical trial eligibility criteria to RWD, statistical rigor and application of matching methods, the definition of end points, follow-up, and reporting of adverse events, which may challenge the conclusions reported in studies using RWD.

Disclaimers

1. This activity is accredited by the American Medical Association.
2. This activity is free to AMA members.

Register for this Activity