Andrew J. Gross , Courtney E. Pisano , Chachrit Khunsriraksakul , Daniel E. Spratt , Henry S. Park , Yilun Sun , Ming Wang , Nicholas G. Zaorsky
{"title":"Real-World Data: Applications and Relevance to Cancer Clinical Trials","authors":"Andrew J. Gross , Courtney E. Pisano , Chachrit Khunsriraksakul , Daniel E. Spratt , Henry S. Park , Yilun Sun , Ming Wang , Nicholas G. Zaorsky","doi":"10.1016/j.semradonc.2023.06.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the gold standard for comparative-effectiveness research (CER). Since the 1980s, there has been a rise in the creation and utilization of large national cancer databases to provide readily accessible “real-world data” (RWD). This review article discusses the role of RCTs in oncology, and the role of RWD from the national cancer database in CER. RCTs remain the preferred study type for CER because they minimize confounding and bias. RCTs have challenges to conduct, including extensive time and resources, but these factors do not impact the internal validity of the result. Generalizability and external validity are potential limitations of RCTs. RWD is ideal for studying cancer epidemiology, patterns of care, disparities in care delivery, quality-of-care evaluation, and applicability of RCT data in specific populations excluded from RCTs. However, retrospective databases with RWD have limitations in CER due to unmeasured confounders and are often suboptimal in identifying causal treatment effects.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":49542,"journal":{"name":"Seminars in Radiation Oncology","volume":"33 4","pages":"Pages 374-385"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Seminars in Radiation Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1053429623000401","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the gold standard for comparative-effectiveness research (CER). Since the 1980s, there has been a rise in the creation and utilization of large national cancer databases to provide readily accessible “real-world data” (RWD). This review article discusses the role of RCTs in oncology, and the role of RWD from the national cancer database in CER. RCTs remain the preferred study type for CER because they minimize confounding and bias. RCTs have challenges to conduct, including extensive time and resources, but these factors do not impact the internal validity of the result. Generalizability and external validity are potential limitations of RCTs. RWD is ideal for studying cancer epidemiology, patterns of care, disparities in care delivery, quality-of-care evaluation, and applicability of RCT data in specific populations excluded from RCTs. However, retrospective databases with RWD have limitations in CER due to unmeasured confounders and are often suboptimal in identifying causal treatment effects.
期刊介绍:
Each issue of Seminars in Radiation Oncology is compiled by a guest editor to address a specific topic in the specialty, presenting definitive information on areas of rapid change and development. A significant number of articles report new scientific information. Topics covered include tumor biology, diagnosis, medical and surgical management of the patient, and new technologies.