» Articles » PMID: 31399148

Progression Criteria in Trials with an Internal Pilot: an Audit of Publicly Funded Randomised Controlled Trials

Overview
Journal Trials
Publisher Biomed Central
Date 2019 Aug 11
PMID 31399148
Citations 28
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: With millions of pounds spent annually on medical research in the UK, it is important that studies are spending funds wisely. Internal pilots offer the chance to stop a trial early if it becomes apparent that the study will not be able to recruit enough patients to show whether an intervention is clinically effective. This study aims to assess the use of internal pilots in individually randomised controlled trials funded by the Health Technology Assessment (HTA) programme and to summarise the progression criteria chosen in these trials.

Methods: Studies were identified from reports of the HTA committees' funding decisions from 2012 to 2016. In total, 242 trials were identified of which 134 were eligible to be included in the audit. Protocols for the eligible studies were located on the NIHR Journals website, and if protocols were not available online then study managers were contacted to provide information.

Results: Over two-thirds (72.4%) of studies said in their protocol that they would include an internal pilot phase for their study and 37.8% of studies without an internal pilot had done an external pilot study to assess the feasibility of the full study. A typical study with an internal pilot has a target sample size of 510 over 24 months and aims to recruit one-fifth of their total target sample size within the first one-third of their recruitment time. There has been an increase in studies adopting a three-tiered structure for their progression rules in recent years, with 61.5% (16/26) of studies using the system in 2016 compared to just 11.8% (2/17) in 2015. There was also a rise in the number of studies giving a target recruitment rate in their progression criteria: 42.3% (11/26) in 2016 compared to 35.3% (6/17) in 2015.

Conclusions: Progression criteria for an internal pilot are usually well specified but targets vary widely. For the actual criteria, red/amber/green systems have increased in popularity in recent years. Trials should justify the targets they have set, especially where targets are low.

Citing Articles

APPROACH: Analysis of Proton versus Photon Radiotherapy in Oligodendroglioma and Assessment of Cognitive Health - study protocol paper for a phase III multicentre, open-label randomised controlled trial.

Slevin F, Hudson E, Boele F, Powell J, Noutch S, Borland M BMJ Open. 2025; 15(2):e097810.

PMID: 40010843 PMC: 11865786. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-097810.


A Bayesian adaptive feasibility design for rare diseases.

Churipuy M, Golchi S, Hudson M, Hoa S Contemp Clin Trials Commun. 2024; 42:101392.

PMID: 39618478 PMC: 11605459. DOI: 10.1016/j.conctc.2024.101392.


Three-outcome designs for external pilot trials with progression criteria.

Wilson D, Hudson E, Brown S BMC Med Res Methodol. 2024; 24(1):226.

PMID: 39358754 PMC: 11446087. DOI: 10.1186/s12874-024-02351-x.


Reporting and communication of sample size calculations in adaptive clinical trials: a review of trial protocols and grant applications.

Zhang Q, Dimairo M, Julious S, Lewis J, Yu Z BMC Med Res Methodol. 2024; 24(1):216.

PMID: 39333920 PMC: 11430544. DOI: 10.1186/s12874-024-02339-7.


MulTI-domain self-management in older People wiTh OstEoarthritis and multi-morbidities: protocol for the TIPTOE randomised controlled trial.

Deere R, Pallmann P, Shepherd V, Brookes-Howell L, Carson-Stevens A, Davies F Trials. 2024; 25(1):557.

PMID: 39180101 PMC: 11344358. DOI: 10.1186/s13063-024-08380-7.


References
1.
Palmer R, Enderby P, Cooper C, Latimer N, Julious S, Paterson G . Computer therapy compared with usual care for people with long-standing aphasia poststroke: a pilot randomized controlled trial. Stroke. 2012; 43(7):1904-11. DOI: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.112.650671. View

2.
Palmer R, Cooper C, Enderby P, Brady M, Julious S, Bowen A . Clinical and cost effectiveness of computer treatment for aphasia post stroke (Big CACTUS): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial. Trials. 2015; 16:18. PMC: 4318176. DOI: 10.1186/s13063-014-0527-7. View

3.
Avery K, Williamson P, Gamble C, OConnell Francischetto E, Metcalfe C, Davidson P . Informing efficient randomised controlled trials: exploration of challenges in developing progression criteria for internal pilot studies. BMJ Open. 2017; 7(2):e013537. PMC: 5318608. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-013537. View

4.
Walters S, Dos Anjos Henriques-Cadby I, Bortolami O, Flight L, Hind D, Jacques R . Recruitment and retention of participants in randomised controlled trials: a review of trials funded and published by the United Kingdom Health Technology Assessment Programme. BMJ Open. 2017; 7(3):e015276. PMC: 5372123. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-015276. View

5.
Julious S, Horspool M, Davis S, Franklin M, Smithson W, Norman P . Open-label, cluster randomised controlled trial and economic evaluation of a brief letter from a GP on unscheduled medical contacts associated with the start of the school year: the PLEASANT trial. BMJ Open. 2018; 8(4):e017367. PMC: 5914776. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017367. View