Bhatt A. Evolution of clinical research: a history before and beyond James Lind. Perspect Clin Res. 2010;1(1):6–10.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Beckman R, Natanegara F, Singh P, et al. Advancing innovative clinical trials to efficiently deliver medicines to patients. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2023;21(8):543–4.

Article  Google Scholar 

FDA Website. Master Protocols: Efficient Clinical Trial Design Strategies to Expedite Development of Oncology Drugs and Biologics Guidance for Industry, March, 2022.

FDA Website. Complex Innovative Trial Design Meeting Program, 2023.

Antonijevic Z, Beckman R. Platform Trial Designs in Drug Development: Umbrella Trials and Basket Trials; 1st Edition. Taylor & Francis Group, 2018.

DeSalvo, A. CTTI Case Study Exchange: Building Better Clinical Trials: Be the Match Helps Patients More Easily Find & Join relevant Trials. Retrieved from https://connects.ctti-clinicaltrials.org/case_study_exchange?utf8=%E2%9C%93&filter%5Bsearch_text%5D=&filter%5Bcategory%5D%5B%5D=&filter%5Borganization_type%5D%5B%5D= on July 11, 2023.

Antonijevic Z, Beckman R, Huml J, et al. Patient Benefits from Innovative Designs in Rare Diseases (Chapter 10). In Huml R (Editor), Rare Disease Drug Development: Clinical, Scientific, Patient and Caregiver Perspectives. Springer Publishing, Cham 2021.

Tang R, Beckman R, Liu Y, et al. Novel Approaches to Clinical Trials in Rare Diseases (Chapter 9). In: Huml R, editor., et al., Rare Disease Drug Development: Clinical, Scientific Patient and Caregiver Perspectives. Cham: Spinger Publishing; 2021.

Google Scholar 

Kim E, Herbst R, Wistuba J, et al. The BATTLE trial: personalizing therapy for lung cancer. Cancer Discov. 2011;1(1):44–53.

Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

National Institutes of Health, N. C. Lung-MAP: Master Protocol for Lung Cancer. Retrieved from https://www.cancer.gov/types/lung/research/lung-map on July 11, 2023.

The Cancer Letter, Guest Editorial. Lung-MAP: A five-year recap on the first master protocol trial in cancer research. Retrieved from https://cancerletter.com/guest-editorial/20200221_1/ on July 11, 2023; dated February 21, 2020.

Chen C, Li N, Yuan S, et al. Statistical design and considerations of a phase 3 basket trial for simultaneous investigation of multiple tumor types in one study. Stat Biopharm Res. 2016;8:248–57.

Article  Google Scholar 

Beckman R, Antonijevic Z, Kalamegham R, Cong C. Adaptive design for a confirmatory basket trial in multiple tumor types based on a putative predictive biomarker. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2016;100:617–25.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

He L, Ren Y, Chen H, et al. Efficiency of a randomized confirmatory basket trial design constrained to control the family wise error rate by indication. Stat Methods Med Res. 2022;31:1207–23.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Park JJH, Siden E, Zoratti M, et al. Systematic review of basket trials, umbrella trials, and platform trials: a landscape analysis of master protocols. Trials. 2019;20:572. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-019-3664-1.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Clinicaltrials.gov. A Trial to Evaluate Multiple Regimens in Newly Diagnosed and Recurrent Glioblastoma (GBM AGILE). Retrieved from7https://classic.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT039770447 on July 11, 2023.

Clinicaltrials.gov. I-SPY TRIAL: Neoadjuvant and Personalized Adaptive Novel Agents to Treat Breast Cancer (I-SPY). Retrieved from https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01042379 on July 11, 2023.

ClinicalTrials.gov. Lung-MAP: A Master Screening Protocol for Previously-Treated Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer. Retrieved from https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03851445 on July 11, 2023.

Meyer E, Mesenbrink P, Dunger-Baldauf C. The evolution of master protocol clinical trial designs: a systematic review of the literature review. Clin Therapeutic. 2020;42(7):1330–60.

Article  Google Scholar 

FDA Website. FDA Patient Engagement Partnerships (CTTI). Retrieved from https://www.fda.gov/patients/learn-about-fda-patient-engagement/fda-patient-engagement-partnerships on July 11, 2023.

Redman MW, Alegra CJ. The master protocol concept. Semin Oncol. 2015;42(5):724–30.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Murphy A, Bere N, Vamvakas S, Marvis M. The added value of patient engagement in early dialogue with the EMA: scientific advice as a case study. Front Med. 2022. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2021.811855.

Article  Google Scholar 

MDGroup. The Complete Guide to Remarkable Patient Engagement With Clinical Trials. Retrieved from https://mdgroup.com/blog/the-complete-guide-to-remarkable-patient-engagement-with-clinical-trials/ on July 11, 2023; dated November 26, 2020.

Lu C, Li X, Broglio K, et al. Practical considerations and recommendations for master protocol framework: basket, umbrella and platform trials. Therapeutic Innov Regulatory Sci. 2021;5:1145–54.

Article  Google Scholar 

Sudhop T, Brun N, Riedel C, et al. Master protocols in clinical trials: a universal Swiss army knife? Lancet Oncol Personal View. 2019;20(6):E336-342.

Article  Google Scholar 

FDA Website. IND Applications for Clinical Investigations: Regulatory and Administrative Components. March 07, 2022.

World Medical Association. Declaration of Helsinki – Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects, 64th WMA General Assembly, Frontoleza, Brazil. Retrieved from https://www.wma.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/DoH-Oct2008.pdf on July 11, 2023.

FDA Website. Diversity Plans to Improve Enrollment of Participants From Underrepresented Racial and Ethnic Populations in Clinical Trials. Retrieved from https://www.fda.gov/media/157635/download; April 2022.

Benderly B. Advocacy groups are crucial players in developing neurotherapeutics. NeuroRx. 2004;1(4):500–2.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Eva V, Finlay T, Schuitmaker-Warnaar T, et al. Evaluating the “Return on patient engagement initiatives” in medicines research and development: a literature review. Health Expert. 2020;23(1):5–18.

Google Scholar 

Collyar D. How have patient advocates in the United States benefitted cancer research? Nat Rev Cancer. 2005;5(1):73–8.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Cottler L, McCloskey D, Aguilar-Gaxiola S, et al. Community needs, concerns, and perceptions about health research: findings from the clinical and translational science award sentinel network. Am J Public Health. 2013;103(9):1685–92.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Huml R. Filling a Regulatory Void: Patient Advocates Submit Guidance for Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy. RAPS Regulatory Focus, 5pp, 2014.

Katz M, Archer L, Peppercorn J, et al. Patient advocates’ role in clinical trials: perspectives from Cancer and Leukemia Group B investigators and advocates. Cancer. 2012;118(19):4801–5.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Huml R, Dawson J, Bailey M, et al. Accelerating rare disease drug development: lessons learned from muscular dystrophy patient advocacy groups. Therapeutic Innov Regulatory Sci. 2020;5:370–7.

Google Scholar 

Delgado J, Huang A. Improving the patient experience during musculoskeletal interventional procedures. Skeletal Radiol. 2023;52(5):889–95. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-022-04154-x.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Clinical Trials Transformation Initiative (CTTI). Master Protocol Studies. Retrieved from https://ctti-clinicaltrials.org/our-work/novel-clinical-trial-designs/master-protocol-studies/ on July 11, 2023.

FDA Website. Master Protocols: Efficient Clinical Trial Design Strategies to Expedite Development of Oncology Drugs and Biologics Guidance for Industry. Retrieved from https://www.fda.gov/media/120721/download on July 11, 2023.

Kim S, Bruinooge S, Roberts S, et al. Broadening eligibility criteria to make clinical trials more representative: American society of clinical oncology and friends of cancer research joint research statement. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35(33):3737–44.

Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Kim S, Uldrick T, Schenkel C, et al. Continuing to broaden eligibility criteria to make clinical trials more representative and inclusive: ASCO-friends of cancer research joint research statement. Clin Cancer Res. 2021;27(9):2394–9.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Levitan B, Getz K, DiMasi J, et al. Assessing the financial value of patient engagement: a quantitative approach from CTTI’s patient groups and clinical trials project. Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2018;52(2):220–9.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

FDA Website. Cancer Clinical Trial Eligibility Criteria: Available Therapy in Non-Curative Settings. Retrieved from https://www.fda.gov/media/150244/download on July 11, 2023; dated July 2022.

Sacristan J, Aguaron A, Avendano-Sola C, et al. Patient involvement in clinical research: why, when and how. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2016;10:631–40.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Kinter E, Schmeding A, Rudolph I, et al. Identifying patient-relevant endpoints among individuals with schizophrenia: an application of patient-centered health technology assessment. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2009;25(1):35–41.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Kersting C, Kneer M, Barzel A. Patient-relevant outcomes: what are we talking about? A scoping review to improve conceptual clarity. BMC Health Serv Res. 2020;20(1):596.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

FDA Website. Patient-Reported Outcome Measures: Use in Medical Product Development to Support Labeling Claims. Retrieved from https://www.fda.gov/media/77832/download on July 11, 2023; dated December 2009.

FDA Website. Patient-Focused Drug Development Guidance Public Workshop: Incorporating Clinical Outcome Assessments into Endpoints for Regulatory Decision-Making. Retrieved from https://www.fda.gov/media/132505/download on July 11, 2023; dated December 6, 2019.

FDA Website. Core Patient-Reported Outcomes in Cancer Clinical Trials. Retrieved from https://www.fda.gov/media/149994/download on July 11, 2023; dated June 2021.

FDA Website. Principles for Selecting, Developing, Modifying, and Adapting Patient-Reported Outcome Instruments for Use in Medical Device Evaluation. Retrieved from https://www.fda.gov/media/141565/download on July 11, 2023; dated January 26, 2022.

FDA Website. Patient Engagement in the Design and Conduct of Medical Device Clinical Studies. Retrieved from https://www.fda.gov/media/130917/download on July 11, 2023; dated January 26, 2022.

Moore J, Goodson N, Wicks P, Reites J. What role can decentralized trial designs play to improve rare disease studies? Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2022;17:240.

Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

FDA Website. Patient-Focused Drug Development Guidance Public Workshop: Incorporating Clinical Outcome Assessments into Endpoints for Regulatory Decision-Making. Retrieved from https://www.fda.gov/media/132505/download on July 23, 2023; dated December 6, 2019.

Gavrilovic M, Popovic D. A principal component analysis (PCA) based assessment of the gait performance. BiomedTech. 2021;66(5):449–57.

Google Scholar 

Apostolaros M, Babaian D, Corneli A, et al. Legal, regulatory, and practical issues to consider when adopting decentralized clinical trials: recommendations from the clinical trials transformation initiative. Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2020;54(4):779–87.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

King-Kallimanis B, Howie L, et al. Patient reported outcomes in anti-PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor immunotherapy registration trials: FDA analysis of data submitted and future directions. Clin Trials. 2019;16(3):322–6. https://doi.org/10.1177/1740774519836991.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Van Norman G. Decentralized Clinical Trials: The Future of Medicinal Product Development? Journal of American College of Cardiology: Basic to Translational Science, 6(14), 2021.

Goodson N, Wicks P, Morgan J, et al. Opportunities and counterintuitive challenges for decentralized clinical trials to broaden participant inclusion. Nat Portfolio J Digital Medicine. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-022-00603-y.

Article  Google Scholar 

de Jong A, van Rissel T, Zuidgeest M, et al. Opportunities and challenges for decentralized clinical trials: European regulator’s perspective. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2022;112(2):344–52.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Ghadessi M, Di J, Wang J, et al. Decentralized clinical trials and rare diseases: a DIA-innovative design scientific Working Group (DIA-IDSWG) perspective. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13023-023-02693-7.