Large simple randomized controlled trials-from drugs to medical devices: lessons from recent experience
- PMID: 39833917
- PMCID: PMC11749104
- DOI: 10.1186/s13063-025-08724-x
Large simple randomized controlled trials-from drugs to medical devices: lessons from recent experience
Erratum in
-
Correction: Large simple randomized controlled trials-from drugs to medical devices: lessons from recent experience.Trials. 2025 Mar 6;26(1):80. doi: 10.1186/s13063-025-08783-0. Trials. 2025. PMID: 40050928 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
Abstract
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the cornerstone of modern evidence-based medicine. They are considered essential to establish definitive evidence of efficacy and safety for new drugs, and whenever possible they should also be the preferred method for investigating new high-risk medical devices. Well-designed studies robustly inform clinical practice guidelines and decision-making, but administrative obstacles have made it increasingly difficult to conduct informative RCTs. The obstacles are compounded for RCTs of high-risk medical devices by extra costs related to the interventional procedure that is needed to implant the device, challenges with willingness to randomize patients throughout a trial, and difficulties in ensuring proper blinding even with sham procedures. One strategy that may help is to promote the wider use of simpler and more streamlined RCTs using data that are collected routinely during healthcare delivery. Recent large simple RCTs have successfully compared the performance of drugs and of high-risk medical devices, against alternative treatments; they enrolled many patients in a short time, limited costs, and improved efficiency, while also achieving major impact. From a task conducted within the CORE-MD project, we report from our combined experience of designing and conducting large pharmaceutical trials during the COVID-19 pandemic, and of planning and coordinating large registry-based RCTs of cardiovascular devices. We summarize the essential principles and utility of large simple RCTs, likely applicable to all interventions but especially in order to promote their wider adoption to evaluate new medical devices.
Keywords: Large simple trials; Medical devices; Randomized controlled trials.
© 2025. The Author(s).
Conflict of interest statement
Declarations. Ethics approval and consent to participate: Not applicable. Consent for publication: Not applicable. Competing interests: MJL is co-lead of the RECOVERY trial, which is funded by grants from Medical Research Council, National Institute for Health Research, Wellcome, and UK Foreign Development and Commonwealth Office. He designs and conducts randomized clinical trials funded by institution grants from the biopharmaceutical industry (Novartis, Boehringer Ingelheim). He is Chief Executive Officer of Protas, a not-for-profit company established to facilitate the design and conduct of clinical trials and supported through institutional grants and research contracts from NHS England, Google Ventures, Schmidt Futures, Flu Lab, Sanofi, Regeneron, Moderna, Apollo Therapeutics, and BioNTech. He leads the Good Clinical Trials Collaborative, which is funded by Wellcome and Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. All other authors report no conflicts of interest.
Figures


References
-
- Bothwell LE, Greene JA, Podolsky SH, Jones DS. Assessing the gold standard — lessons from the history of RCTs. N Engl J Med. 2016;374(22):2175–81. 10.1056/NEJMms1604593. - PubMed
-
- Collins R, Bowman L, Landray M, Peto R. The magic of randomization versus the myth of real-world evidence. N Engl J Med. 2020;382(7):674–8. 10.1056/nejmsb1901642. - PubMed
-
- Bowman L, Weidinger F, Albert MA, et al. Randomized trials fit for the 21st century. A joint opinion from the European Society of Cardiology, American Heart Association, American College of Cardiology, and the World Heart Federation. Eur Heart J. 2023;44(11):931–4. 10.1093/EURHEARTJ/EHAC633. - PMC - PubMed
-
- Fraser AG, Byrne RA, Kautzner J, et al. Implementing the new European regulations on medical devices-clinical responsibilities for evidence-based practice: a report from the Regulatory Affairs Committee of the European Society of Cardiology. Eur Heart J. 2020;41(27):2589–96. 10.1093/eurheartj/ehaa382. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources