Review Article
Early stopping of randomized clinical trials for overt efficacy is problematic

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.07.016Get rights and content

Abstract

Objective

To illustrate controversial issues associated with stopping randomized controlled trials (RCTs) early for apparent benefit.

Study Design and Setting

The article presents our review of prior relevant work and our research group's reflections on early stopping.

Results

Compelling evidence suggests that trials stopped early for benefit systematically overestimate treatment effects, sometimes by a large amount. Unresolved controversies in trials stopped early for benefit include ethical and statistical problems in the interpretation of results.

Conclusions

The best strategy to minimize the problems associated with early stopping of RCTs for benefit is not to stop early. As an alternative, we suggest a threefold approach: a low P-value as the threshold for stopping at the time of interim analyses, not to look before a sufficiently large number of events has accrued and continuation of enrollment and follow-up for a further period.

Section snippets

Four reasons for early termination

There are four major reasons for stopping a randomized clinical trial (RCT) early. First, the trial may show serious adverse effects and may be stopped for unacceptable safety. This was the case, for instance, in an RCT that investigated the effect of hydrocortisone treatment on survival without bronchopulmonary dysplasia in preterm infants [1]. This study was discontinued early because of gastrointestinal perforations in the hydrocortisone group [1].

Second, investigators may stop the trial if

Motivations for early stopping

There are two potentially justifiable reasons for early termination of a trial showing apparent large benefit. First, one might make an argument that it is unethical to continue to randomize patients in the face of such a result. This consideration may be compelling for investigators, patients, and their advocates, and DMCs. Second, scarce research resources might be better invested in addressing other questions if one believes an apparent large benefit has adequately addressed a research

Acknowledgment

We wish to thank the UK MRC for supporting our ongoing work on the impact of early stopping of trials. Matthias Briel is supported by a grant from the Swiss National Science Foundation.

References (35)

  • A. Laupacis et al.

    How should results from completed studies influence ongoing clinical trials? The CAFA study experience

    Ann Intern Med

    (1991)
  • M.R. Smith et al.

    Celecoxib versus placebo for men with prostate cancer and a rising serum prostate-specific antigen after radical prostatectomy and/or radiation therapy

    J Clin Oncol

    (2006)
  • E.G. Papanikolaou et al.

    In vitro fertilization with single blastocyst-stage versus single cleavage-stage embryos

    N Engl J Med

    (2006)
  • Draft guidance for clinical trial sponsors on the establishment and operation of clinical trial data monitoring...
  • M.R. Sydes et al.

    Reported use of data monitoring committees in the main published reports of randomized controlled trials: a cross-sectional study

    Clin Trials

    (2004)
  • DAMOCLES Study Group

    NHS health technology assessment programme: a proposed charter for clinical trial data monitoring committees: helping them to do their job well

    Lancet

    (2005)
  • A.S. Slutsky et al.

    Data safety and monitoring boards

    N Engl J Med

    (2004)
  • Cited by (0)

    View full text