Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2004 Jun 19;328(7454):1463.
doi: 10.1136/bmj.38118.685289.55. Epub 2004 May 26.

Satisfaction of the uncertainty principle in cancer clinical trials: retrospective cohort analysis

Steven Joffe  1 , David P Harrington, Stephen L George, Ezekiel J Emanuel, Lindsay A Budzinski, Jane C Weeks
Affiliations

Satisfaction of the uncertainty principle in cancer clinical trials: retrospective cohort analysis

Steven Joffe et al. BMJ. .

Abstract

Objective: To assess whether publicly funded adult cancer trials satisfy the uncertainty principle, which states that physicians should enroll a patient in a trial only if they are substantially uncertain which of the treatments in the trial is most appropriate for the patient. This principle is violated if trials systematically favour either the experimental or the standard treatment.

Design: Retrospective cohort study of completed cancer trials, with randomisation as the unit of analysis.

Setting: Two cooperative research groups in the United States.

Studies included: 93 phase III randomised trials (103 randomisations) that completed recruitment of patients between 1981 and 1995.

Main outcome measures: Whether the randomisation favoured the experimental treatment, the standard treatment, or neither treatment; effect size (outcome of the experimental treatment compared with outcome of the standard treatment) for each randomisation.

Results: Three randomisations (3%) favoured the standard treatment, 70 (68%) found no significant difference between treatments, and 30 (29%) favoured the experimental treatment. The average effect size was 1.20 (95% confidence interval 1.13 to 1.28), reflecting a slight advantage for the experimental treatment.

Conclusions: In cooperative group trials in adults with cancer, there is a measurable average improvement in disease control associated with assignment to the experimental rather than the standard arm. However, the heterogeneity of outcomes and the small magnitude of the advantage suggest that, as a group, these trials satisfy the uncertainty principle.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Distribution of effect sizes among Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group and Cancer and Leukemia Group B randomised controlled trials, 1981-95. Effect sizes >1 favour experimental treatment; effect sizes <1 favour standard treatment
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Hellman S, Hellman DS. Of mice but not men. Problems of the randomized clinical trial. N Engl J Med 1991;324: 1585-9. - PubMed
    1. Fried C. Medical experimentation: personal integrity and social policy. New York: American Elsevier, 1974.
    1. Lilford RJ. Ethics of clinical trials from a bayesian and decision analytic perspective: whose equipoise is it anyway? BMJ 2003;326: 980-1. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Freedman B. Equipoise and the ethics of clinical research. N Engl J Med 1987;317: 141-5. - PubMed
    1. Peto R, Baigent C. Trials: the next 50 years. Large scale randomised evidence of moderate benefits. BMJ 1998;317: 1170-1. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types