Activity ID
13335Expires
May 20, 2027Format Type
Journal-basedCME Credit
1Fee
$30CME Provider: JAMA
Description of CME Course
Importance Many cancer clinical investigators view clinical trials as offering better care for patients than routine clinical care. However, definitive evidence of clinical benefit from trial participation (hereafter referred to as the participation effect) has yet to emerge.
Objective To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the evidence examining whether patient participation in cancer trials was associated with greater survival benefit compared with routine care.
Data Sources Studies were found through PubMed and Embase (January 1, 2000, until August 31, 2022), as well as backward and forward citation searching.
Study Selection Studies were included that compared overall survival of trial participants and routine care patients.
Data Extraction and Synthesis Data extraction and methodological quality assessment were completed by 2 independent coders using Covidence software. Data were pooled using a random-effects model and analyzed based on the quality of the comparison between trial participants and routine care patients (ie, extent to which studies controlled for bias and confounders).
Main Outcomes and Measures The hazard ratio (HR) for overall survival of trial participants vs routine care patients.
Results Thirty-nine publications were included, comprising 85 comparisons of trial participants and routine care patients. The meta-analysis revealed a statistically significant overall survival benefit for trial participants (HR, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.69-0.82]) when all studies were pooled, regardless of design or quality. However, survival benefits diminished in study subsets that matched trial participants and routine care patients for eligibility criteria (HR, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.75-0.97]) and disappeared when only high-quality studies were pooled (HR, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.80-1.05]). They also disappeared when estimates were adjusted for potential publication bias (HR, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.86-1.03]).
Conclusions and Relevance Many studies suggest a survival benefit for cancer trial participants. However, these benefits were not detected in studies using designs addressing important sources of bias and confounding. Pooled results of high-quality studies are not consistent with a beneficial effect of trial participation on its own.
Disclaimers
1. This activity is accredited by the American Medical Association.
2. This activity is free to AMA members.
ABMS Member Board Approvals by Type
ABMS Lifelong Learning CME Activity
Allergy and Immunology
Anesthesiology
Colon and Rectal Surgery
Family Medicine
Medical Genetics and Genomics
Nuclear Medicine
Ophthalmology
Orthopaedic Surgery
Pathology
Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
Plastic Surgery
Preventive Medicine
Psychiatry and Neurology
Radiology
Thoracic Surgery
Urology
Commercial Support?
NoNOTE: If a Member Board has not deemed this activity for MOC approval as an accredited CME activity, this activity may count toward an ABMS Member Board’s general CME requirement. Please refer directly to your Member Board’s MOC Part II Lifelong Learning and Self-Assessment Program Requirements.
Educational Objectives
To identify the key insights or developments described in this article.
Keywords
Oncology
Competencies
Medical Knowledge
CME Credit Type
AMA PRA Category 1 Credit
DOI
10.1001/jama.2024.6281