Talk:Adaptive clinical trial

Apparently irrelevant text - moved here
Removed the following from the Alzheimer subsection as it seemed to have no relevance to Adaptive clinical trials. A project spearheaded by the Coalition Against Major Diseases shares negative outcomes to help better understand how the disease progresses to understand whether a clinical trial failed for a logistical reason, such as too few patients, or whether the drug has no effect. CAMD developed a simulation tool to help figure out how best to design future trials. Possibly could move to alzheimer's disease or clinical trial ? - Rod57 (talk) 13:31, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Proposed split out of I-SPY 2
The I-SPY 2 trial could have so much written about it that it would unbalance this article. Propose split so it can be described overall rather than just as an example of an adaptive trial. - Rod57 (talk) 13:34, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Abandoned drugs - irrelevant section moved here
The following does not seem to belong in this article {{quotation|

Abandoned drugs
Research groups are partnering with companies to take over research on abandoned compounds. The concept is that the value of some drugs was obscured by conventional trial protocols. Companies have begun sharing results on failed drugs, with the aim of figuring out whether the too-small number of patients who benefited from the drug can be characterized, leading to a targeted therapy for such patients.

Britain's Cancer Research UK plans to reinvigorate research on promising chemical compounds that companies abandon. At the end of a trial, companies can pay a fee to examine the data and resume work on the compound. Otherwise, the group can team with another company. Currently, nine compounds are under development through the program.

About 30% of experimental chemical compounds fail in early-stage testing, and even more in later stages. Because of this, pharmaceutical companies may stop work and instead devote resources elsewhere. }} Where should it go ? - Rod57 (talk) 13:39, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Adaptive licensing - irrelevant section moved here
This is unrelated to adaptive clinical trials - could be a new article ? {{quotation|

Adaptive licensing
"Adaptive licensing" is a new approval system that would allow new drugs to be approved conditionally and their use restricted to patients who meet specific criteria. Under the current system, once a drug is licensed, any physician can prescribe it for any patient. Under the new approach companies would continue to assess effectiveness and safety using data from approved patients.

Sanofi SA's diet pill Acomplia was removed from the European market in 2009 because of concerns over safety. The medication had appeared to work without problems in clinical trials. A later analysis found that Acomplia failed for multiple reasons, including that patients failed to follow the treatment protocol. Doctors failed to follow patients closely and were prescribing the drug for unapproved conditions. Adaptive licensing would have avoided such problems.

PCAST also recommended what it called a "Special Medical Use" license for drugs that had been shown to be safe and effective in a specific group of patients. }} More related to the FDA Accelerated approval process ? - Rod57 (talk) 13:43, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Adaptive clinical trial. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140106031647/http://www.mrc-bsu.cam.ac.uk/CHTMR/DJS_forweb.pdf to http://www.mrc-bsu.cam.ac.uk/CHTMR/DJS_forweb.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 16:03, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Merger proposal
I propose merging Adaptive clinical trial into Adaptive design (medicine). The topic is duplicated: they are on exactly the same subject. There is unique content in both pages. A merger would not cause any article-size or weighting problems in Adaptive design (medicine). ADtrials (talk) 08:45, 8 June 2022 (UTC)