Abstract:Objectives This study aims to analyse the association between clinical trial design and treatment effects for cancer drugs with US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval. Design Cross-sectional study and meta-analysis. Setting Data from Drugs@FDA, FDA labels, ClincialTrials.gov and the Global Burden of Disease study. Participants Pivotal trials for 170 drugs with FDA approval across 437 cancer indications between 2000 and 2022. Main outcome measures Treatment effects were measured in HRs for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), and in relative risk for tumour response. Random-effects meta-analyses and meta-regressions explored the association between treatment effect estimates and clinical trial design for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and single-arm trials. Results Across RCTs, greater effect estimates were observed in smaller trials for OS (ß=0.06, p<0.001), PFS (ß=0.15, p<0.001) and tumour response (ß=−3.61, p<0.001). Effect estimates were larger in shorter trials for OS (ß=0.08, p<0.001) and PFS (ß=0.09, p=0.002). OS (ß=0.04, p=0.006), PFS (ß=0.10, p<0.001) and tumour response (ß=−2.91, p=0.004) outcomes were greater in trials with fewer centres. HRs for PFS (0.54 vs 0.62, p=0.011) were lower in trials testing the new drug to an inactive (placebo/no treatment) rather than an active comparator. The analysed efficacy population (intention-to-treat, per-protocol, or as-treated) was not consistently associated with treatment effects. Results were consistent for single-arm trials and in multivariable analyses. Conclusions Pivotal trial design is significantly associated with measured treatment effects. Particularly small, short, single-centre trials testing a new drug compared with an inactive rather than an active comparator could overstate treatment outcomes. Future studies should verify results in unsuccessful trials, adjust for further confounders and examine other therapeutic areas. The FDA, manufacturers and trialists must strive to conduct robust clinical trials with a low risk of bias.

Differential Treatment Effects of Subgroup Analyses in Oncology Trials, 2004-2020

Subgroup Analyses in Reporting of Phase III Clinical Trials in Solid Tumors.

Towards Treatment Effect Interpretability: A Bayesian Re-analysis of 194,129 Patient Outcomes Across 230 Oncology Trials

Supplementary Table S3 from Proportional Hazards Violations in Phase III Cancer Clinical Trials: A Potential Source of Trial Misinterpretation

Association of differential censoring with survival and suboptimal control arms among oncology clinical trials

Supplementary Data S1 from Proportional Hazards Violations in Phase III Cancer Clinical Trials: A Potential Source of Trial Misinterpretation

Supplementary Data S2 from Proportional Hazards Violations in Phase III Cancer Clinical Trials: A Potential Source of Trial Misinterpretation

A comprehensive analysis of patient demographics and disparities in contemporary oncology clinical trials (2022-2023).

Improving subgroup analysis using methods to extend inferences to specific target populations

Ancestral differences in anti-cancer treatment efficacy and their underlying genomic and molecular alterations

Detecting critical treatment effect bias in small subgroups

Identification and inference for subgroups with differential treatment efficacy from randomized controlled trials with survival outcomes through multiple testing

Under-Representation and Under-Reporting of Minoritized Racial and Ethnic Groups in Clinical Trials on Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors

Impact of Broadening Trial Eligibility Criteria on the Inclusion of Patients With Brain Metastases in Cancer Clinical Trials: Time Series Analyses for 2012-2022

How comparable are patient outcomes in the "real-world" with populations studied in pivotal AML trials?

Distinguishing Clinical from Statistical Significances in Contemporary Comparative Effectiveness Research

Clinical trial design and treatment effects: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled and single-arm trials supporting 437 FDA approvals of cancer drugs and indications

Use of conditional estimates of effect in cancer epidemiology: An application to lung cancer treatment

Comparing Approaches to Treatment Effect Estimation for Subgroups in Clinical Trials

Statistical controversies in clinical research: basket trials, umbrella trials, and other master protocols: a review and examples

Real-world impact of differences in the WHO and ICC classifications of non-Hodgkin lymphoma: a LEO Cohort Study analysis