alexa Selection Criteria in Clinical Trials: A Clinical Conundrum | OMICS International
ISSN: 2168-9857
Medical & Surgical Urology
Like us on:
Make the best use of Scientific Research and information from our 700+ peer reviewed, Open Access Journals that operates with the help of 50,000+ Editorial Board Members and esteemed reviewers and 1000+ Scientific associations in Medical, Clinical, Pharmaceutical, Engineering, Technology and Management Fields.
Meet Inspiring Speakers and Experts at our 3000+ Global Conferenceseries Events with over 600+ Conferences, 1200+ Symposiums and 1200+ Workshops on
Medical, Pharma, Engineering, Science, Technology and Business

Selection Criteria in Clinical Trials: A Clinical Conundrum

Marc R Matrana1,2* and Alex Dreisin1

1 The University of Queensland School of Medicine, Ochsner Clinical School, 1514 Jefferson Hwy., New Orleans, LA, USA

2Ochsner Clinic Foundation, 1514 Jefferson Hwy., New Orleans, LA, USA

*Corresponding Author:
Marc R Matrana
Medical Director
Precision Cancer Therapies (Phase I ) Program
Ochsner Cancer Institute, USA
Tel: 504-842-3910
E-mail: [email protected]

Received date: November 02, 2016; Accepted date: November 03, 2016; Published date: November 11, 2016

Citation: Matrana MR, Dreisin A (2016) Selection Criteria in Clinical Trials: A Clinical Conundrum. Med Sur Urol 5: e119. doi:10.4172/2168-9857.1000e119

Copyright: © 2016 Matrana MR et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Visit for more related articles at Medical & Surgical Urology

Editorial

Imagine that for the past two years, you have been caring for a previously healthy 45 year old patient with metastatic genitourinary carcinoma. After exhibiting only a partial response to first and second line combinations of chemotherapy and radiation therapy, several bony metastases re-emerge begin to show signs of aggressive expansion. You have determined he would be the perfect candidate for a Phase 2 randomized controlled trial (RCT) at a nearby academic center and, with cautious optimism, explain the potential of the new agent being investigated. You are nearly set to proceed when suddenly you are informed that the patient does not qualify for the study on the grounds that they do not satisfy one small detail of study’s numerous enrollment criteria. You carefully review the inclusion criteria, and it turns out that patients with a remote history of vague seizure-like activity after a sports related concussion as a youth and therefore must be disqualified. Frustrated, you argue that his seizure-like activity was remote, not straight forward, not unusual after an acute head injury, and in no way associated with chronic epilepsy, and has no clinical impact on his underlying fitness to participate in an RCT. But these arguments will ultimately be made in vain, as seizure disqualifies the patient regardless of etiology. These criteria are set in stone.

This has become an increasingly frequent occurrence for clinicians as we are faced with an ever expanding number of inclusion and exclusion criteria in RCT protocols. It raises both ethical and academic questions. While the ethical dilemma of restricting treatments to only the most robust and fit patients can be justified by the need to amass a data set with a minimal number of confounding variables, there is also the question of external validity. With an ever increasing number of exclusion criteria included in RCTs, are we reaching the point where these sample populations no longer represent the real-world clinic patients that these drugs are intended to treat?

This is not to say that standardized recruitment to RCTs isn’t essential. Strict inclusion criteria maintains high internal validity, minimizes any confounding variables, and helps ensure that a causal relationship can be established between the interventions and outcomes at hand. However, as the criteria for what should make up an RCT sample population become increasingly restrictive, several troubling phenomena arise. It should be apparent that patients that are ineligible for RCTs have significantly worse outcomes than trial-eligible patients. But how do we manage these patients? With an absence of any well-established studies, these patients can often be relegated to choosing between dubious, potentially dangerous therapies lacking any real scientific data for their populations, or palliative, end-of-life measures.

Fortunately, several potential solutions have gained momentum in recent years to address the increasingly restrictive environment of larger RCTs. Individual providers, for example, have the ability to longitudinally track treatment responses in their own patient populations, without the constraints present in a larger RCT. Retrospective real-world data may not be as robust as RCTs, but certainly provides insights for patient populations who would never be eligible for trials. Other alternatives include extracting data from expanded access programs, single center studies, community networks, national registries, international chart reviews, and insurance company databases, among other big data solutions.

In a world where the outcomes of RCTs can make or break major pharmaceutical companies, it is unlikely that cherry-picking of RCT subjects via restrictive inclusions/exclusion criteria will improve. Therefore, clinicians must be saavy as they evaluate data and extrapolate findings to apply to their own patients that may be very different that those who were enrolled in pivotal studies.

Select your language of interest to view the total content in your interested language
Post your comment

Share This Article

Relevant Topics

Recommended Conferences

  • 7th International Conference on Clinical and Medical Case Reports June 01-02, 2018 Osaka, Japan Theme: Focusing the breakthroughs of case reports in Clinical & Medical Research
    June 01-02, 2018 Osaka, Japan
  • 7th International Conference and Exhibition on Surgery June 21-23, 2018 Dublin, Ireland Theme: Advancements and Endeavours in the Field of Surgery
    June 21-23, 2018 Dublin, Ireland Dublin, Ireland
  • World Summit on Trauma and Reconstructive Surgery Sep 10-11, 2018 Singapore Theme: Expanding new horizons in Trauma and Surgery
    Sep 10-11, 2018 Singapore City, Singapore
  • International Conference on Reproduction and Fertility October 18-19, 2018 Abu Dhabi, UAE
    October 18-19, 2018 Abu Dhabi, UAE
  • 11th International Conference on Clinical and Medical Case Reports October 22-23, 2018 Turkey
    October 22-23, 2018 Istanbul, Turkey

Article Usage

  • Total views: 8250
  • [From(publication date):
    December-2016 - Feb 25, 2018]
  • Breakdown by view type
  • HTML page views : 8169
  • PDF downloads : 81
 

Post your comment

captcha   Reload  Can't read the image? click here to refresh

Peer Reviewed Journals
 
Make the best use of Scientific Research and information from our 700 + peer reviewed, Open Access Journals
International Conferences 2018-19
 
Meet Inspiring Speakers and Experts at our 3000+ Global Annual Meetings

Contact Us

Agri & Aquaculture Journals

Dr. Krish

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9040

Biochemistry Journals

Datta A

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9037

Business & Management Journals

Ronald

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9042

Chemistry Journals

Gabriel Shaw

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9040

Clinical Journals

Datta A

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9037

Engineering Journals

James Franklin

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9042

Food & Nutrition Journals

Katie Wilson

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9042

General Science

Andrea Jason

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9043

Genetics & Molecular Biology Journals

Anna Melissa

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9006

Immunology & Microbiology Journals

David Gorantl

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9014

Materials Science Journals

Rachle Green

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9039

Nursing & Health Care Journals

Stephanie Skinner

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9039

Medical Journals

Nimmi Anna

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9038

Neuroscience & Psychology Journals

Nathan T

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9041

Pharmaceutical Sciences Journals

Ann Jose

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9007

Social & Political Science Journals

Steve Harry

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9042

 
© 2008- 2018 OMICS International - Open Access Publisher. Best viewed in Mozilla Firefox | Google Chrome | Above IE 7.0 version