Analysis of Clinical Trials in Radiation Oncology: A Systematic Characterization of the Clinicaltrials.gov Database

Clinical trials involving positron emission tomography and prostate cancer: an analysis of the ClinicalTrials.gov database

Background

The goal of this study is to evaluate the status and future perspectives of clinical trials on positron emission tomography in prostate cancer for diagnostic or therapeutic as well as for surveillance purposes.

Methods

The www.ClinicalTrials.gov database was searched on the 20th of January 2017 for all trials containing terms describing “prostate cancer” (prostate, prostatic, malignant, malignancy, cancer, tumor) and “positron emission tomography”. In total 167 trials were identified. Trials that included diseases other than PCa were excluded (n = 27; 16%). Furthermore, we excluded trials (n = 4, 2%) withdrawn prior to first patient enrollment. The remaining trials (n = 137, 82%) were selected for further manual classification analysis.

Results

One hundred thirty-seven trials were detected and analyzed. Majority of trials were in “active” recruitment status (n = 46, 34%) followed by trials that had been “completed” - (n = 34, 25%) and trials with “closed recruitment but active follow-up” (n = 23, 17%). Phase 1 and 2 comprised 46% of the complete trial portfolio. Locally confined disease was of major interest (n = 46, 34%), followed by metastatic disease – not otherwise specified (n = 43, 13%). Evaluation of PET was the primary goal of the trial in 114 (83%) cases. Most of the trials evaluated only one agent (n = 122, 89%). Choline and PSMA represented two major groups (total 50%) and they were equally distributed across trial portfolio with 25% (n = 34) each. PSMA trials showed the highest average annual growth rate of 56%. The trials were conducted in 17 countries.

Conclusion

The scientific community is showing a strong and ever-growing interest in the field and we expect that in the coming years, more phase III trials will be initiated ultimately delivering the required Level 1 evidence.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13014-018-1057-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

A 20-Year Analysis of Clinical Trials Involving Proton Beam Therapy

Purpose

Clinical trials (CTs) in proton beam therapy (PBT) are important for determining its benefits relative to other treatments. An analysis of PBT trials is, thus, warranted to understand the current state of PBT CTs and the factors affecting current and future trials.

Materials and Methods

We queried the clinicaltrials.gov Website using the search terms: proton beam therapy, proton radiation, and protons. A total of 152 PBT CTs were identified. We used χ² analysis and logistic regression to evaluate trial characteristics.

Results

Most CTs were recruiting (n = 79; 52.0%), phase II (n = 95; 62.5%), open label (n = 134; 88.2%), single-group assignment (n = 84; 55.3%), and with primary treatment endpoints of safety and efficacy (n = 94; 61.8%). The primary treatment sites included gastrointestinal (n = 32; 21.1%), central nervous system (n = 31; 20.4%), lung (n = 21; 13.8%), prostate (n = 19; 12.5%), sarcoma (n = 15; 9.9%), and others (n = 24; 15.8%). Comparison studies between radiation modalities involved PBT and intensity-modulated photon therapy (n = 11; 7.2%), PBT and general photon therapy (n = 8; 5.3%), and PBT and carbon-ion therapy (n = 7; 4.6%). The PBT CTs underwent substantial growth after 2008 but now appear to be in decline. Nongovernmental institutions, comprising university centers, hospital systems, and research groups, have funded the greatest number of CTs (n= 106; 69.7%). The National Institutes of Health (NIH) were more likely to fund CTs involving the central nervous system (P = 0.02). Trials involving NIH funding were more likely to result in successful trial completion (P = 0.02).

Conclusion

Among PBT CTs, most were phase II trials, with a very few being phase III CTs. Funding of PBT CTs originating from industry or the NIH is limited. Recently, there has been a declining trajectory of newly initiated PBT trials. It is not yet clear whether this represents a true trend or just a pause in CT implementation. Despite multiple impediments to PBT CTs, the particle therapy community continues to work toward evidence generation.