Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Medicine 1/2018

Open Access 01-12-2018 | Guideline

Development process of a consensus-driven CONSORT extension for randomised trials using an adaptive design

Authors: Munyaradzi Dimairo, Elizabeth Coates, Philip Pallmann, Susan Todd, Steven A. Julious, Thomas Jaki, James Wason, Adrian P. Mander, Christopher J. Weir, Franz Koenig, Marc K. Walton, Katie Biggs, Jon Nicholl, Toshimitsu Hamasaki, Michael A. Proschan, John A. Scott, Yuki Ando, Daniel Hind, Douglas G. Altman

Published in: BMC Medicine | Issue 1/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Adequate reporting of adaptive designs (ADs) maximises their potential benefits in the conduct of clinical trials. Transparent reporting can help address some obstacles and concerns relating to the use of ADs. Currently, there are deficiencies in the reporting of AD trials. To overcome this, we have developed a consensus-driven extension to the CONSORT statement for randomised trials using an AD. This paper describes the processes and methods used to develop this extension rather than detailed explanation of the guideline.

Methods

We developed the guideline in seven overlapping stages:
1)
Building on prior research to inform the need for a guideline;
 
2)
A scoping literature review to inform future stages;
 
3)
Drafting the first checklist version involving an External Expert Panel;
 
4)
A two-round Delphi process involving international, multidisciplinary, and cross-sector key stakeholders;
 
5)
A consensus meeting to advise which reporting items to retain through voting, and to discuss the structure of what to include in the supporting explanation and elaboration (E&E) document;
 
6)
Refining and finalising the checklist; and
 
7)
Writing-up and dissemination of the E&E document.
 
The CONSORT Executive Group oversaw the entire development process.

Results

Delphi survey response rates were 94/143 (66%), 114/156 (73%), and 79/143 (55%) in rounds 1, 2, and across both rounds, respectively. Twenty-seven delegates from Europe, the USA, and Asia attended the consensus meeting. The main checklist has seven new and nine modified items and six unchanged items with expanded E&E text to clarify further considerations for ADs. The abstract checklist has one new and one modified item together with an unchanged item with expanded E&E text. The E&E document will describe the scope of the guideline, the definition of an AD, and some types of ADs and trial adaptations and explain each reporting item in detail including case studies.

Conclusions

We hope that making the development processes, methods, and all supporting information that aided decision-making transparent will enhance the acceptability and quick uptake of the guideline. This will also help other groups when developing similar CONSORT extensions. The guideline is applicable to all randomised trials with an AD and contains minimum reporting requirements.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Lauer MS, Gordon D, Wei G, Pearson G. Efficient design of clinical trials and epidemiological research: is it possible? Nat Rev Cardiol. 2017;14(8):493-501.CrossRef Lauer MS, Gordon D, Wei G, Pearson G. Efficient design of clinical trials and epidemiological research: is it possible? Nat Rev Cardiol. 2017;14(8):493-501.CrossRef
2.
go back to reference O’Neill RT. FDA’s critical path initiative: a perspective on contributions of biostatistics. Biom J. 2006;48:559–64.CrossRef O’Neill RT. FDA’s critical path initiative: a perspective on contributions of biostatistics. Biom J. 2006;48:559–64.CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Chow S-C. Adaptive clinical trial design. Annu Rev Med. Annual Reviews. 2014;65:405–15.CrossRef Chow S-C. Adaptive clinical trial design. Annu Rev Med. Annual Reviews. 2014;65:405–15.CrossRef
4.
go back to reference CHMP. Reflection paper on methodological issues in confirmatory clinical trials planned with an adaptive design. 2007. CHMP. Reflection paper on methodological issues in confirmatory clinical trials planned with an adaptive design. 2007.
5.
go back to reference FDA. Guidance for industry: adaptive design clinical trials for drugs and biologics. 2010. FDA. Guidance for industry: adaptive design clinical trials for drugs and biologics. 2010.
6.
go back to reference FDA. Adaptive designs for medical device clinical studies: draft guidance for industry and Food and Drug Administration staff. 2015. FDA. Adaptive designs for medical device clinical studies: draft guidance for industry and Food and Drug Administration staff. 2015.
7.
go back to reference Bauer P, Bretz F, Dragalin V, König F, Wassmer G. Twenty-five years of confirmatory adaptive designs: opportunities and pitfalls. Stat Med. 2016;35:325–47.CrossRef Bauer P, Bretz F, Dragalin V, König F, Wassmer G. Twenty-five years of confirmatory adaptive designs: opportunities and pitfalls. Stat Med. 2016;35:325–47.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Bretz F, Koenig F, Brannath W, Glimm E, Posch M. Adaptive designs for confirmatory clinical trials. Stat Med. 2009;28:1181–217.CrossRef Bretz F, Koenig F, Brannath W, Glimm E, Posch M. Adaptive designs for confirmatory clinical trials. Stat Med. 2009;28:1181–217.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Pallmann P, Bedding AW, Choodari-Oskooei B, Dimairo M, Flight L, Hampson LV, et al. Adaptive designs in clinical trials: why use them, and how to run and report them. BMC Med. BioMed Central. 2018;16:29. Pallmann P, Bedding AW, Choodari-Oskooei B, Dimairo M, Flight L, Hampson LV, et al. Adaptive designs in clinical trials: why use them, and how to run and report them. BMC Med. BioMed Central. 2018;16:29.
10.
go back to reference Guetterman TC, Fetters MD, Legocki LJ, Mawocha S, Barsan WG, Lewis RJ, et al. Reflections on the adaptive designs accelerating promising trials into treatments (ADAPT-IT) process-findings from a qualitative study. Clin Res Regul Aff. 2015;32:121–30.CrossRef Guetterman TC, Fetters MD, Legocki LJ, Mawocha S, Barsan WG, Lewis RJ, et al. Reflections on the adaptive designs accelerating promising trials into treatments (ADAPT-IT) process-findings from a qualitative study. Clin Res Regul Aff. 2015;32:121–30.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Rong Y. Regulations on adaptive design clinical trials. Pharm Regul Aff Open Access. OMICS International; 2014;03. Rong Y. Regulations on adaptive design clinical trials. Pharm Regul Aff Open Access. OMICS International; 2014;03.
12.
go back to reference Quinlan J, Krams M. Implementing adaptive designs: logistical and operational considerations. Drug Inf J. 2006;40:437–44.CrossRef Quinlan J, Krams M. Implementing adaptive designs: logistical and operational considerations. Drug Inf J. 2006;40:437–44.CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Gaydos B, Anderson KM, Berry D, Burnham N, Chuang-Stein C, Dudinak J, et al. Good practices for adaptive clinical trials in pharmaceutical product development. Drug Inf J. 2009;43:539–56.CrossRef Gaydos B, Anderson KM, Berry D, Burnham N, Chuang-Stein C, Dudinak J, et al. Good practices for adaptive clinical trials in pharmaceutical product development. Drug Inf J. 2009;43:539–56.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Thorlund K, Haggstrom J, Park JJ, Mills EJ. Key design considerations for adaptive clinical trials: a primer for clinicians. BMJ. British Medical Journal Publishing Group. 2018;360:k698.CrossRef Thorlund K, Haggstrom J, Park JJ, Mills EJ. Key design considerations for adaptive clinical trials: a primer for clinicians. BMJ. British Medical Journal Publishing Group. 2018;360:k698.CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Park JJ, Thorlund K, Mills EJ. Critical concepts in adaptive clinical trials. Clin Epidemiol. Dove Press. 2018;10:343–51.CrossRef Park JJ, Thorlund K, Mills EJ. Critical concepts in adaptive clinical trials. Clin Epidemiol. Dove Press. 2018;10:343–51.CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Chow S-C, Chang M. Adaptive design methods in clinical trials - a review. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2008;3:11.CrossRef Chow S-C, Chang M. Adaptive design methods in clinical trials - a review. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2008;3:11.CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Hatfield I, Allison A, Flight L, Julious SA, Dimairo M. Adaptive designs undertaken in clinical research: a review of registered clinical trials. Trials. BioMed Central. 2016;17:150. Hatfield I, Allison A, Flight L, Julious SA, Dimairo M. Adaptive designs undertaken in clinical research: a review of registered clinical trials. Trials. BioMed Central. 2016;17:150.
19.
go back to reference Sato A, Shimura M, Gosho M. Practical characteristics of adaptive design in phase 2 and 3 clinical trials. J Clin Pharm Ther. 2018;43(2):170-80.CrossRef Sato A, Shimura M, Gosho M. Practical characteristics of adaptive design in phase 2 and 3 clinical trials. J Clin Pharm Ther. 2018;43(2):170-80.CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Lin M, Lee S, Zhen B, Scott J, Horne A, Solomon G, et al. CBER’s experience with adaptive design clinical trials. Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2015;50:195–203.CrossRef Lin M, Lee S, Zhen B, Scott J, Horne A, Solomon G, et al. CBER’s experience with adaptive design clinical trials. Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2015;50:195–203.CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Yang X, Thompson L, Chu J, Liu S, Lu H, Zhou J, et al. Adaptive design practice at the Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH), January 2007 to May 2013. Ther Innov Regul Sci. SAGE Publications. 2016;50:710–7. Yang X, Thompson L, Chu J, Liu S, Lu H, Zhou J, et al. Adaptive design practice at the Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH), January 2007 to May 2013. Ther Innov Regul Sci. SAGE Publications. 2016;50:710–7.
22.
go back to reference Morgan CC, Huyck S, Jenkins M, Chen L, Bedding A, Coffey CS, et al. Adaptive design: results of 2012 survey on perception and use. Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2014;48:473–81.CrossRef Morgan CC, Huyck S, Jenkins M, Chen L, Bedding A, Coffey CS, et al. Adaptive design: results of 2012 survey on perception and use. Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2014;48:473–81.CrossRef
23.
go back to reference Bauer P, Einfalt J. Application of adaptive designs – a review. Biom J. 2006;48:493–506.CrossRef Bauer P, Einfalt J. Application of adaptive designs – a review. Biom J. 2006;48:493–506.CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Curtin F, Heritier S. The role of adaptive trial designs in drug development. Expert Rev Clin Pharmacol. 2017;10(7):727-36.CrossRef Curtin F, Heritier S. The role of adaptive trial designs in drug development. Expert Rev Clin Pharmacol. 2017;10(7):727-36.CrossRef
25.
go back to reference Elsäßer A, Regnstrom J, Vetter T, Koenig F, Hemmings RJ, Greco M, et al. Adaptive clinical trial designs for European marketing authorization: a survey of scientific advice letters from the European Medicines Agency. Trials. 2014;15:383.CrossRef Elsäßer A, Regnstrom J, Vetter T, Koenig F, Hemmings RJ, Greco M, et al. Adaptive clinical trial designs for European marketing authorization: a survey of scientific advice letters from the European Medicines Agency. Trials. 2014;15:383.CrossRef
26.
go back to reference Dimairo M, Boote J, Julious SA, Nicholl JP, Todd S. Missing steps in a staircase: a qualitative study of the perspectives of key stakeholders on the use of adaptive designs in confirmatory trials. Trials. BioMed Central Ltd. 2015;16:430. Dimairo M, Boote J, Julious SA, Nicholl JP, Todd S. Missing steps in a staircase: a qualitative study of the perspectives of key stakeholders on the use of adaptive designs in confirmatory trials. Trials. BioMed Central Ltd. 2015;16:430.
27.
go back to reference Meurer WJ, Legocki L, Mawocha S, Frederiksen SM, Guetterman TC, Barsan W, et al. Attitudes and opinions regarding confirmatory adaptive clinical trials: a mixed methods analysis from the Adaptive Designs Accelerating Promising Trials into Treatments (ADAPT-IT) project. Trials. BioMed Central. 2016;17:373. Meurer WJ, Legocki L, Mawocha S, Frederiksen SM, Guetterman TC, Barsan W, et al. Attitudes and opinions regarding confirmatory adaptive clinical trials: a mixed methods analysis from the Adaptive Designs Accelerating Promising Trials into Treatments (ADAPT-IT) project. Trials. BioMed Central. 2016;17:373.
28.
go back to reference Dimairo M, Julious SA, Todd S, Nicholl JP, Boote J. Cross-sector surveys assessing perceptions of key stakeholders towards barriers, concerns and facilitators to the appropriate use of adaptive designs in confirmatory trials. Trials. BioMed Central Ltd. 2015;16:585. Dimairo M, Julious SA, Todd S, Nicholl JP, Boote J. Cross-sector surveys assessing perceptions of key stakeholders towards barriers, concerns and facilitators to the appropriate use of adaptive designs in confirmatory trials. Trials. BioMed Central Ltd. 2015;16:585.
29.
go back to reference Love SB, Brown S, Weir CJ, Harbron C, Yap C, Gaschler-Markefski B, et al. Embracing model-based designs for dose-finding trials. Br J Cancer. Nature Publishing Group. 2017;117:332–9. Love SB, Brown S, Weir CJ, Harbron C, Yap C, Gaschler-Markefski B, et al. Embracing model-based designs for dose-finding trials. Br J Cancer. Nature Publishing Group. 2017;117:332–9.
30.
go back to reference Jaki T. Uptake of novel statistical methods for early-phase clinical studies in the UK public sector. Clin Trials. 2013;10:344–6.CrossRef Jaki T. Uptake of novel statistical methods for early-phase clinical studies in the UK public sector. Clin Trials. 2013;10:344–6.CrossRef
31.
go back to reference Quinlan J, Gaydos B, Maca J, Krams M. Barriers and opportunities for implementation of adaptive designs in pharmaceutical product development. Clin Trials. 2010;7:167–73.CrossRef Quinlan J, Gaydos B, Maca J, Krams M. Barriers and opportunities for implementation of adaptive designs in pharmaceutical product development. Clin Trials. 2010;7:167–73.CrossRef
32.
go back to reference Coffey CS, Levin B, Clark C, Timmerman C, Wittes J, Gilbert P, et al. Overview, hurdles, and future work in adaptive designs: perspectives from a National Institutes of Health-funded workshop. Clin Trials. 2012;9:671–80.CrossRef Coffey CS, Levin B, Clark C, Timmerman C, Wittes J, Gilbert P, et al. Overview, hurdles, and future work in adaptive designs: perspectives from a National Institutes of Health-funded workshop. Clin Trials. 2012;9:671–80.CrossRef
34.
go back to reference Stevely A, Dimairo M, Todd S, Julious SA, Nicholl J, Hind D, et al. An investigation of the shortcomings of the CONSORT 2010 statement for the reporting of group sequential randomised controlled trials: a methodological systematic review. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0141104.CrossRef Stevely A, Dimairo M, Todd S, Julious SA, Nicholl J, Hind D, et al. An investigation of the shortcomings of the CONSORT 2010 statement for the reporting of group sequential randomised controlled trials: a methodological systematic review. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0141104.CrossRef
35.
go back to reference Mistry P, Dunn JA, Marshall A. A literature review of applied adaptive design methodology within the field of oncology in randomised controlled trials and a proposed extension to the CONSORT guidelines. BMC Med Res Methodol. BMC Medical Research Methodology. 2017;17:108.CrossRef Mistry P, Dunn JA, Marshall A. A literature review of applied adaptive design methodology within the field of oncology in randomised controlled trials and a proposed extension to the CONSORT guidelines. BMC Med Res Methodol. BMC Medical Research Methodology. 2017;17:108.CrossRef
36.
go back to reference Stevely A, Dimairo M, Todd S, Julious SA, Nicholl J, Hind D, et al. An investigation of the shortcomings of the CONSORT 2010 Statement for the reporting of group sequential randomised controlled trials: a methodological systematic review. Shamji M, editors. PLoS One. Public Library of Science; 2015;10:e0141104. Stevely A, Dimairo M, Todd S, Julious SA, Nicholl J, Hind D, et al. An investigation of the shortcomings of the CONSORT 2010 Statement for the reporting of group sequential randomised controlled trials: a methodological systematic review. Shamji M, editors. PLoS One. Public Library of Science; 2015;10:e0141104.
37.
go back to reference Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D. CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomized trials. Ann Intern Med. 2010;152:726–32.CrossRef Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D. CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomized trials. Ann Intern Med. 2010;152:726–32.CrossRef
39.
go back to reference Moher D, Schulz KF, Simera I, Altman DG. Guidance for developers of health research reporting guidelines. PLoS Med. Public Library of Science. 2010;7:e1000217. Moher D, Schulz KF, Simera I, Altman DG. Guidance for developers of health research reporting guidelines. PLoS Med. Public Library of Science. 2010;7:e1000217.
41.
go back to reference Kairalla JA, Coffey CS, Thomann MA, Muller KE. Adaptive trial designs: a review of barriers and opportunities. Trials. 2012;13:145.CrossRef Kairalla JA, Coffey CS, Thomann MA, Muller KE. Adaptive trial designs: a review of barriers and opportunities. Trials. 2012;13:145.CrossRef
43.
go back to reference Dragalin V. Adaptive designs: terminology and classification. Drug Inf J. 2006;40:425–35.CrossRef Dragalin V. Adaptive designs: terminology and classification. Drug Inf J. 2006;40:425–35.CrossRef
44.
go back to reference Cook T, DeMets DL. Review of draft FDA adaptive design guidance. J Biopharm Stat. 2010;20:1132–42.CrossRef Cook T, DeMets DL. Review of draft FDA adaptive design guidance. J Biopharm Stat. 2010;20:1132–42.CrossRef
45.
go back to reference Chow S-C, Corey R. Benefits, challenges and obstacles of adaptive clinical trial designs. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2011;6:79.CrossRef Chow S-C, Corey R. Benefits, challenges and obstacles of adaptive clinical trial designs. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2011;6:79.CrossRef
46.
go back to reference Gallo P, Chuang-Stein C, Dragalin V, Gaydos B, Krams M, Pinheiro J. Adaptive designs in clinical drug development--an executive summary of the PhRMA Working Group. J Biopharm Stat. 2006;16:275–83 discussion 285-91, 293–8, 311–2.CrossRef Gallo P, Chuang-Stein C, Dragalin V, Gaydos B, Krams M, Pinheiro J. Adaptive designs in clinical drug development--an executive summary of the PhRMA Working Group. J Biopharm Stat. 2006;16:275–83 discussion 285-91, 293–8, 311–2.CrossRef
47.
go back to reference Rosenberg MJ. The agile approach to adaptive research: optimizing efficiency in clinical development. 1st ed. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, Inc; 2010.CrossRef Rosenberg MJ. The agile approach to adaptive research: optimizing efficiency in clinical development. 1st ed. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, Inc; 2010.CrossRef
48.
go back to reference Brown CH, Ten Have TR, Jo B, Dagne G, Wyman PA, Muthén B, et al. Adaptive designs for randomized trials in public health. Annu Rev Public Health. NIH Public Access. 2009;30:1–25.CrossRef Brown CH, Ten Have TR, Jo B, Dagne G, Wyman PA, Muthén B, et al. Adaptive designs for randomized trials in public health. Annu Rev Public Health. NIH Public Access. 2009;30:1–25.CrossRef
49.
go back to reference Wang SJ, Hung HM, O'Neill R. Adaptive design clinical trials and trial logistics models in CNS drug development. Eur Neuropsychopharmacol. 2011;21(2):159-66.CrossRef Wang SJ, Hung HM, O'Neill R. Adaptive design clinical trials and trial logistics models in CNS drug development. Eur Neuropsychopharmacol. 2011;21(2):159-66.CrossRef
50.
go back to reference Elman SA, Ware JH, Gottlieb AB, Merola JF. Adaptive clinical trial design: an overview and potential applications in dermatology. J Invest Dermatol. 2016;136:1325–9.CrossRef Elman SA, Ware JH, Gottlieb AB, Merola JF. Adaptive clinical trial design: an overview and potential applications in dermatology. J Invest Dermatol. 2016;136:1325–9.CrossRef
51.
go back to reference Porcher R, Lecocq B, Vray M, D’Andon A, Bassompierre F, Béhier J-M, et al. Adaptive methods: when and how should they be used in clinical trials? Therapie. 2011;66:319–26.CrossRef Porcher R, Lecocq B, Vray M, D’Andon A, Bassompierre F, Béhier J-M, et al. Adaptive methods: when and how should they be used in clinical trials? Therapie. 2011;66:319–26.CrossRef
52.
go back to reference Maca J, Dragalin V, Gallo P. Adaptive clinical trials: overview of phase III designs and challenges. Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2014;48:31–40.CrossRef Maca J, Dragalin V, Gallo P. Adaptive clinical trials: overview of phase III designs and challenges. Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2014;48:31–40.CrossRef
53.
go back to reference Bauer P, Brannath W. The advantages and disadvantages of adaptive designs for clinical trials. Drug Discov Today. 2004;9:351–7.CrossRef Bauer P, Brannath W. The advantages and disadvantages of adaptive designs for clinical trials. Drug Discov Today. 2004;9:351–7.CrossRef
54.
go back to reference Coffey CS, Kairalla JA. Adaptive clinical trials: progress and challenges. Drugs R D. 2008;9:229–42.CrossRef Coffey CS, Kairalla JA. Adaptive clinical trials: progress and challenges. Drugs R D. 2008;9:229–42.CrossRef
55.
go back to reference Gallo P. Operational challenges in adaptive design implementation. Pharm Stat. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 2006;5:119–24. Gallo P. Operational challenges in adaptive design implementation. Pharm Stat. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 2006;5:119–24.
56.
go back to reference Gaydos B, Anderson KM, Berry D, Burnham N, Chuang-Stein C, Dudinak J, et al. Good practices for adaptive clinical trials in pharmaceutical product development. Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2009;43:539–56. Gaydos B, Anderson KM, Berry D, Burnham N, Chuang-Stein C, Dudinak J, et al. Good practices for adaptive clinical trials in pharmaceutical product development. Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2009;43:539–56.
57.
go back to reference Phillips AJ, Keene ON. Adaptive designs for pivotal trials: discussion points from the PSI Adaptive Design Expert Group. Pharm Stat. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 2006;5:61–6. Phillips AJ, Keene ON. Adaptive designs for pivotal trials: discussion points from the PSI Adaptive Design Expert Group. Pharm Stat. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 2006;5:61–6.
58.
go back to reference Gould AL. How practical are adaptive designs likely to be for confirmatory trials? Biom J. 2006;48:644–9.CrossRef Gould AL. How practical are adaptive designs likely to be for confirmatory trials? Biom J. 2006;48:644–9.CrossRef
59.
go back to reference Spencer K, Colvin K, Braunecker B, Brackman M, Ripley J, Hines P, et al. Operational challenges and solutions with implementation of an adaptive seamless phase 2/3 study. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2012;6:1296–304.CrossRef Spencer K, Colvin K, Braunecker B, Brackman M, Ripley J, Hines P, et al. Operational challenges and solutions with implementation of an adaptive seamless phase 2/3 study. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2012;6:1296–304.CrossRef
60.
go back to reference Koch A. Confirmatory clinical trials with an adaptive design. Biom J. 2006;48:574–85.CrossRef Koch A. Confirmatory clinical trials with an adaptive design. Biom J. 2006;48:574–85.CrossRef
61.
go back to reference Chuang-Stein C, Beltangady M. FDA draft guidance on adaptive design clinical trials: Pfizer’s perspective. J Biopharm Stat. 2010;20:1143–9.CrossRef Chuang-Stein C, Beltangady M. FDA draft guidance on adaptive design clinical trials: Pfizer’s perspective. J Biopharm Stat. 2010;20:1143–9.CrossRef
62.
go back to reference Eldridge SM, Chan CL, Campbell MJ, Bond CM, Hopewell S, Thabane L, et al. CONSORT 2010 statement: extension to randomised pilot and feasibility trials. Pilot Feasibility Stud. BioMed Central. 2016;2:64.CrossRef Eldridge SM, Chan CL, Campbell MJ, Bond CM, Hopewell S, Thabane L, et al. CONSORT 2010 statement: extension to randomised pilot and feasibility trials. Pilot Feasibility Stud. BioMed Central. 2016;2:64.CrossRef
63.
go back to reference Kirkham JJ, Gorst S, Altman DG, Blazeby J, Clarke M, Devane D, et al. COS-STAR: a reporting guideline for studies developing core outcome sets (protocol). Trials. BioMed Central. 2015;16:373. Kirkham JJ, Gorst S, Altman DG, Blazeby J, Clarke M, Devane D, et al. COS-STAR: a reporting guideline for studies developing core outcome sets (protocol). Trials. BioMed Central. 2015;16:373.
64.
go back to reference Gamble C, Krishan A, Stocken D, Lewis S, Juszczak E, Doré C, et al. Guidelines for the content of statistical analysis plans in clinical trials. JAMA. American Medical Association. 2017;318:2337.CrossRef Gamble C, Krishan A, Stocken D, Lewis S, Juszczak E, Doré C, et al. Guidelines for the content of statistical analysis plans in clinical trials. JAMA. American Medical Association. 2017;318:2337.CrossRef
65.
go back to reference Moher D, Hopewell S, Schulz KF, Montori V, Gøtzsche PC, Devereaux PJ, et al. CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ. 2010;340:c869.CrossRef Moher D, Hopewell S, Schulz KF, Montori V, Gøtzsche PC, Devereaux PJ, et al. CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ. 2010;340:c869.CrossRef
66.
go back to reference Diamond IR, Grant RC, Feldman BM, Pencharz PB, Ling SC, Moore AM, et al. Defining consensus: a systematic review recommends methodologic criteria for reporting of Delphi studies. J Clin Epidemiol. 2014;67:401–9.CrossRef Diamond IR, Grant RC, Feldman BM, Pencharz PB, Ling SC, Moore AM, et al. Defining consensus: a systematic review recommends methodologic criteria for reporting of Delphi studies. J Clin Epidemiol. 2014;67:401–9.CrossRef
67.
go back to reference Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol. 2006;3:77–101.CrossRef Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol. 2006;3:77–101.CrossRef
68.
go back to reference Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977;33:159.CrossRef Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977;33:159.CrossRef
69.
go back to reference Efron B. Bootstrap methods: another look at the jackknife. Ann Stat. Institute of Mathematical Statistics. 1979;7:1–26. Efron B. Bootstrap methods: another look at the jackknife. Ann Stat. Institute of Mathematical Statistics. 1979;7:1–26.
70.
go back to reference Bland M, Altman D. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet. Elsevier. 1986;327:307–10.CrossRef Bland M, Altman D. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet. Elsevier. 1986;327:307–10.CrossRef
71.
go back to reference Akacha M, Bretz F, Ruberg S. Estimands in clinical trials – broadening the perspective. Stat Med. 2017;36:5–19.CrossRef Akacha M, Bretz F, Ruberg S. Estimands in clinical trials – broadening the perspective. Stat Med. 2017;36:5–19.CrossRef
72.
go back to reference Akacha M, Bretz F, Ohlssen D, Rosenkranz G, Schmidli H. Estimands and their role in clinical trials. Stat Biopharm Res. Taylor & Francis. 2017;9:268–71.CrossRef Akacha M, Bretz F, Ohlssen D, Rosenkranz G, Schmidli H. Estimands and their role in clinical trials. Stat Biopharm Res. Taylor & Francis. 2017;9:268–71.CrossRef
73.
go back to reference Phillips A, Abellan-Andres J, Soren A, Bretz F, Fletcher C, France L, et al. Estimands: discussion points from the PSI estimands and sensitivity expert group. Pharm Stat. 2017;16:6–11.CrossRef Phillips A, Abellan-Andres J, Soren A, Bretz F, Fletcher C, France L, et al. Estimands: discussion points from the PSI estimands and sensitivity expert group. Pharm Stat. 2017;16:6–11.CrossRef
75.
go back to reference Blanco D, Biggane AM, Cobo E. Are CONSORT checklists submitted by authors adequately reflecting what information is actually reported in published papers? Trials. BioMed Central. 2018;19:80. Blanco D, Biggane AM, Cobo E. Are CONSORT checklists submitted by authors adequately reflecting what information is actually reported in published papers? Trials. BioMed Central. 2018;19:80.
76.
go back to reference Agha RA, Fowler AJ, Rajmohan S, Barai I, Orgill DP, Afifi R, et al. Preferred reporting of case series in surgery; the PROCESS guidelines. Int J Surg. 2016;36:319–23.CrossRef Agha RA, Fowler AJ, Rajmohan S, Barai I, Orgill DP, Afifi R, et al. Preferred reporting of case series in surgery; the PROCESS guidelines. Int J Surg. 2016;36:319–23.CrossRef
78.
go back to reference Gagnier JJ, Kienle G, Altman DG, Moher D, Sox H, Riley D, et al. The CARE guidelines: consensus-based clinical case reporting guideline development. Glob Adv Heal Med. SAGE Publications. 2013;2:38–43.CrossRef Gagnier JJ, Kienle G, Altman DG, Moher D, Sox H, Riley D, et al. The CARE guidelines: consensus-based clinical case reporting guideline development. Glob Adv Heal Med. SAGE Publications. 2013;2:38–43.CrossRef
79.
go back to reference Husereau D, Drummond M, Petrou S, Carswell C, Moher D, Greenberg D, et al. Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS)—explanation and elaboration: a report of the ISPOR health economic evaluation publication guidelines good reporting practices task force. Value Heal. Elsevier. 2013;16:231–50.CrossRef Husereau D, Drummond M, Petrou S, Carswell C, Moher D, Greenberg D, et al. Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS)—explanation and elaboration: a report of the ISPOR health economic evaluation publication guidelines good reporting practices task force. Value Heal. Elsevier. 2013;16:231–50.CrossRef
80.
go back to reference Eldridge SM, Chan CL, Campbell MJ, Bond CM, Hopewell S, Thabane L, et al. CONSORT 2010 statement: extension to randomised pilot and feasibility trials. BMJ. BMJ Publishing Group. 2016;355:i5239. Eldridge SM, Chan CL, Campbell MJ, Bond CM, Hopewell S, Thabane L, et al. CONSORT 2010 statement: extension to randomised pilot and feasibility trials. BMJ. BMJ Publishing Group. 2016;355:i5239.
81.
go back to reference Stevens GA, Alkema L, Black RE, Boerma JT, Collins GS, Ezzati M, et al. Guidelines for accurate and transparent health estimates reporting: the GATHER statement. PLoS Med. Public Library of Science. 2016;13:e1002056. Stevens GA, Alkema L, Black RE, Boerma JT, Collins GS, Ezzati M, et al. Guidelines for accurate and transparent health estimates reporting: the GATHER statement. PLoS Med. Public Library of Science. 2016;13:e1002056.
82.
go back to reference Bothwell LE, Avorn J, Khan NF, Kesselheim AS. Adaptive design clinical trials: a review of the literature and ClinicalTrials.gov. BMJ Open. British Medical Journal Publishing Group. 2018;8:e018320. Bothwell LE, Avorn J, Khan NF, Kesselheim AS. Adaptive design clinical trials: a review of the literature and ClinicalTrials.gov. BMJ Open. British Medical Journal Publishing Group. 2018;8:e018320.
83.
go back to reference Lorch U, O’Kane M, Taubel J. Three steps to writing adaptive study protocols in the early phase clinical development of new medicines. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2014;14:1–9.CrossRef Lorch U, O’Kane M, Taubel J. Three steps to writing adaptive study protocols in the early phase clinical development of new medicines. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2014;14:1–9.CrossRef
84.
go back to reference Hopewell S, Clarke M, Moher D, Wager E, Middleton P, Altman DG, et al. CONSORT for reporting randomized controlled trials in journal and conference abstracts: explanation and elaboration. von Elm E, editor. PLoS Med. Public Library of Science; 2008;5:e20. Hopewell S, Clarke M, Moher D, Wager E, Middleton P, Altman DG, et al. CONSORT for reporting randomized controlled trials in journal and conference abstracts: explanation and elaboration. von Elm E, editor. PLoS Med. Public Library of Science; 2008;5:e20.
85.
go back to reference Hopewell S, Clarke M, Moher D, Wager E, Middleton P, Altman DG, et al. CONSORT for reporting randomised trials in journal and conference abstracts. Lancet. 2008;371:281–3.CrossRef Hopewell S, Clarke M, Moher D, Wager E, Middleton P, Altman DG, et al. CONSORT for reporting randomised trials in journal and conference abstracts. Lancet. 2008;371:281–3.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Development process of a consensus-driven CONSORT extension for randomised trials using an adaptive design
Authors
Munyaradzi Dimairo
Elizabeth Coates
Philip Pallmann
Susan Todd
Steven A. Julious
Thomas Jaki
James Wason
Adrian P. Mander
Christopher J. Weir
Franz Koenig
Marc K. Walton
Katie Biggs
Jon Nicholl
Toshimitsu Hamasaki
Michael A. Proschan
John A. Scott
Yuki Ando
Daniel Hind
Douglas G. Altman
Publication date
01-12-2018
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Medicine / Issue 1/2018
Electronic ISSN: 1741-7015
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-018-1196-2

Other articles of this Issue 1/2018

BMC Medicine 1/2018 Go to the issue