Other types of trials
This page tells you about some types of clinical trials. It has information about
Pilot studies (or feasibility studies) are small scale versions of larger trials. The format is the same but they only recruit a small number of people, so are quicker to do.
Not all trials need to have a pilot study first. But they can be a useful way of testing to see if the trial design works. If necessary, the trials team can then make changes to the design before the larger trial starts.
Pilot studies are often too small to say for sure if one treatment is better than another. But they give the research team a good idea of how things will go when they do the larger trial.
Screening means testing people for a particular cancer. Screening trials can be for the general population. Or they can be for a group of people who have a higher than normal risk of developing a disease. The aim is to pick up cancers early, before they have started to cause symptoms. Researchers may plan screening trials to see if new tests are reliable enough to detect particular types of cancer. Or to see if there is an overall benefit in picking up the cancer early.
Prevention trials see whether a particular treatment can prevent cancer developing. The people taking part do not have cancer. As with screening trials they can be carried out in the general population, or in a specific high risk group.
An example of a prevention trial is the IBIS 2 breast cancer prevention trial. The aim of this trial is to see if a drug called anastrozole can prevent breast cancer developing in post menopausal women who are at a high risk of getting it.
The study of causes and patterns of disease is called epidemiology. So an epidemiological study looks at whether a particular factor causes cancer or not. Most epidemiological studies are observational studies.
A cohort is a group of people, and so, cohort studies look at groups of people. A cohort study follows the group over a period of time. This type of study may look at the experiences of people having a certain type of treatment. Cohort studies can also look for risk factors. A research team would recruit a number of people who do not have cancer. The researchers then collect detailed information on all the people taking part for a number of years. They see who in the group develops cancer and who doesn’t. They then look to see whether the people who developed cancer were exposed to particular factors.
An example of a cohort study is the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer (EPIC) study. This study recruited many thousands of people from across Europe in the mid to late 1990s. The researchers are collecting data on several factors including what the group eat and drink. And they will record who develops cancer and who doesn’t. We already have some results. In time, the study will tell us more about what aspects of our diet can cause (or prevent) cancer.
Another example is the British Doctors Study of the 1950s. This was the first study to show a link between smoking and lung cancer. The late Sir Richard Doll and his colleagues recruited 40,000 British male doctors in 1951, and monitored them for 50 years. The results showed that many more doctors who smoked went on to develop lung cancer than those who did not smoke.
Cohort studies are very useful ways of finding out more about risk factors. But they are expensive and time consuming. They can be used when it wouldn’t be possible to test a theory any other way. For example, you couldn’t make a group of people smoke in a randomised trial.
Case control studies work the opposite way to cohort studies. The research team recruits a group of people who have a disease and a group of people who do not (controls). They then look back to see how many people in each group were exposed to a certain risk factor. To make the results as reliable as possible, the researchers may try to match cases and controls for a variety of general factors, such as age and gender.
An example of a case control study would be to recruit a group of people who have lung cancer and a group of people who don’t. And then ask them all if they smoke, and how much. You can then look at how many people in each group smoke to see if there is a link between smoking and lung cancer.
Case control studies are useful, and they are quicker and cheaper than cohort studies. But the results may be less reliable. The research team often has to rely on people thinking back and remembering whether they were exposed to a certain risk factor or not. But people may not remember accurately and this can affect the results.
Another issue is the difference between association and cause. Just because there is an association between a factor and a disease, it doesn’t mean that the factor causes the disease. For example, a case control study may show that people with a lower income are more likely to develop cancer. But it doesn’t mean that the level of income itself causes cancer. It may mean that they have a poor diet or are more likely to smoke.
Cross sectional studies are carried out at one point in time, or over a short period of time. They find out who has been exposed to a risk factor and who has developed cancer, and see if there is a link. An example of a cross sectional study would be to see how many of a particular group of people smoke, and how many of that group have lung cancer.
Cross sectional studies are quicker and cheaper to do. But the results can be less useful. This is partly because cancers usually develop over many years. So looking at the number of people who smoke and the number of people with lung cancer at any one point in time will not give us the full picture. Some of the people recorded as not having cancer may go on to get it in the future. Sometimes researchers will do a cross sectional study first to find a possible link. Then they go on to do a case control or cohort study to look at the issue in more detail.
In this type of trial, results are worked out as you go along, rather than after the whole study closes. You are treated one by one (sequentially), in one of several groups. Neither you nor your doctor will be able to decide which group you are in. Each group has the same treatment, but in different doses or in different ways. The first person has their treatment in group 1. The next person has their treatment in group 2, and so on. When all the groups have treated their first patient, they are filled again, one by one. This carries on until researchers can either see which group has the best results, or that there will not be any difference. Sequential trials can show results earlier than other trials, so need less people to take part.
Rated 5 out of 5 based on 2 votes
Question about cancer? Contact our information nurse team