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
. 2014 Aug;11(4):445-456.
doi: 10.1177/1740774514525691. Epub 2014 Apr 14.

SMART designs in cancer research: Past, present, and future

Affiliations

SMART designs in cancer research: Past, present, and future

Kelley M Kidwell. Clin Trials. 2014 Aug.

Abstract

Background: Cancer affects millions of people worldwide each year. Patients require sequences of treatment based on their response to previous treatments to combat cancer and fight metastases. Physicians provide treatment based on clinical characteristics, changing over time. Guidelines for these individualized sequences of treatments are known as dynamic treatment regimens (DTRs) where the initial treatment and subsequent modifications depend on the response to previous treatments, disease progression, and other patient characteristics or behaviors. To provide evidence-based DTRs, the Sequential Multiple Assignment Randomized Trial (SMART) has emerged over the past few decades.

Purpose: To examine and learn from past SMARTs investigating cancer treatment options, to discuss potential limitations preventing the widespread use of SMARTs in cancer research, and to describe courses of action to increase the implementation of SMARTs and collaboration between statisticians and clinicians.

Conclusion: There have been SMARTs investigating treatment questions in areas of cancer, but the novelty and perceived complexity has limited its use. By building bridges between statisticians and clinicians, clarifying research objectives, and furthering methods work, there should be an increase in SMARTs addressing relevant cancer treatment questions. Within any area of cancer, SMARTs develop DTRs that can guide treatment decisions over the disease history and improve patient outcomes.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Two dynamic treatment regimens, (A,C) and (B,C) where the initial response rate is best for treatment A, but the overall best response rate is for DTR (B,C).
Figure 2
Figure 2
SMART design from an acute myelogenous leukemia trial [7] including 4 embedded DTRs.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Survival curves of marginal treatment regimens from [28].
Figure 4
Figure 4
Survival curves of four DTRs using weighted risk set estimator.
Figure 5
Figure 5
SMART design from a small cell lung carcinoma trial [25]. There are four embedded DTRs in this SMART which will be denoted by CAV-E-RIFA, CAV-T-RIFA, CAV-E-N, CAV-T-N. The DTR CAV-E-RIFA reads as, ‘treat with CAV-E followed by recombinant interferon-alpha (RIFA) if complete response, continue CAV-E if partial or no response’. Another DTR, CAV-E-N, reads as, ‘treat with CAV-E followed by nothing (observation) for those with complete response and continue CAV-E for those without complete response.’

References

    1. Globocan. Globocan 2008 Section of Cancer Information. 2013 http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs297/en/index.html.
    1. Siegel R, DeSantis C, Virgo K, Stein K, Mariotto A, Smith T, et al. Cancer treatment and survivorship statistics, 2012. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians. 2012;62(4):220–241. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.3322/caac.21149. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Chakraborty B. Dynamic Treatment Regimes for Managing Chronic Health Conditions: A Statisticial Perspective. American Journal of Public Health. 2011;101:40–45. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Murphy SA. An experimental design for the development of adaptive treatment strategies. Statistical Methods. 2005;24:1455–81. - PubMed
    1. Lavori PW, Dawson R, J RA. Flexible treatment strategies in chronic disease: Clinical research implications. Biological Psychology. 2000;48:605–614. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources