The special role of federal sponsorship in the design and conduct of drug or biological agent cancer treatment clinical trials.

94 Background: Industry sponsors are incentivized to conduct trials supporting new drug applications to the FDA, focusing largely on single-agent drug trials. In contrast, federally sponsored trials examine a broader set of research questions. However, the quantitative role of federal sponsorship in drug treatment trials has not been described. These data are crucial for policymakers seeking to prioritize federally sponsored trials in a research landscape dominated by industry. Methods: We analyzed registry data from ClinicalTrials.gov between 2008-2022. U.S.-based trials that included drug or biological agents for the purpose of cancer treatment were included. Studies were categorized by lead sponsor (federal versus industry) and by study phase, intervention, de-escalation, rare cancer, and age. Odds ratios were calculated. Chi-square tests were used. Results: Overall, N=8,561 federal (n=1269, 14.8%) and industry (n=7292, 85.2%) sponsored studies were analyzed. Industry trials were more commonly phase III trials and single-agent drug trials (Table). In contrast, federally sponsored studies were more commonly early stage (Phase I or II) trials (90.5% vs 81.0%, OR=2.25, p<.001) and involved more complex multi-modality drug and biological agent combinations alone (22.7% vs 7.5%, OR=3.63, p<.001) or with radiation (9.5% vs 1.3%, OR=7.75, p<.001), surgery (2.5% vs. 0.2%, OR=15.69, p<.001) or other modality (10.8% vs. 2.2%, OR=5.36, p<.001). Federally sponsored trials were also more commonly dose de-escalation trials and trials conducted in rare cancers and in children. Conclusions: Early-phase, multi-modality, dose-deescalation, rare cancer, and child-focused drug and biological agent cancer clinical trials were more likely to be conducted by federally sponsored research groups. These findings highlight the unique role of federally funded studies in cancer clinical trials. Decreases in federal funding may hinder progress in cancer outcomes. Characteristics of federal- versus industry-sponsored cancer clinical trials. Federal Industry Odds ratio (Fed/Ind) P-value Study Characteristic Category N=1269 % N=7292 % Phase 1 or 2 1149 90.5 5905 81.0 2.25 <.001 3 115 9.1 1319 18.1 0.45 <.001 Intervention Single agent Biological (B) 86 6.8 630 8.6 0.77 .03 Single agent Drug (D) 590 46.5 5842 80.1 0.22 <.001 D & B 288 22.7 545 7.5 3.63 <.001 D/B & Radiation 120 9.5 97 1.3 7.75 <.001 D/B & Surgery 32 2.5 12 0.2 15.69 <.001 D/B, Surgery & Radiation 16 1.3 5 0.1 18.61 <.001 D/B and other modality 1 137 10.8 161 2.2 5.36 <.001 Dose de-escalation Yes 20 1.6 46

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
JCO Oncology Practice
Published
2025-10-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1200/op.2025.21.10_suppl.94
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Biomedical Ethics and Regulation
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.16
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The special role of federal sponsorship in the design and conduct of drug or biological agent cancer treatment clinical trials.

Michael LeBlanc, Hong Xiao, Joseph M. Unger, Dawn L. Hershman
1 citations
JCO Oncology Practice
Biomedical Ethics and Regulation
1.16
article

The special role of federal sponsorship in the design and conduct of drug or biological agent cancer treatment clinical trials.

Michael LeBlanc, Hong Xiao, Joseph M. Unger, Dawn L. Hershman
article en
1 citations

Abstract

94 Background: Industry sponsors are incentivized to conduct trials supporting new drug applications to the FDA, focusing largely on single-agent drug trials. In contrast, federally sponsored trials examine a broader set of research questions. However, the quantitative role of federal sponsorship in drug treatment trials has not been described. These data are crucial for policymakers seeking to prioritize federally sponsored trials in a research landscape dominated by industry. Methods: We analyzed registry data from ClinicalTrials.gov between 2008-2022. U.S.-based trials that included drug or biological agents for the purpose of cancer treatment were included. Studies were categorized by lead sponsor (federal versus industry) and by study phase, intervention, de-escalation, rare cancer, and age. Odds ratios were calculated. Chi-square tests were used. Results: Overall, N=8,561 federal (n=1269, 14.8%) and industry (n=7292, 85.2%) sponsored studies were analyzed. Industry trials were more commonly phase III trials and single-agent drug trials (Table). In contrast, federally sponsored studies were more commonly early stage (Phase I or II) trials (90.5% vs 81.0%, OR=2.25, p<.001) and involved more complex multi-modality drug and biological agent combinations alone (22.7% vs 7.5%, OR=3.63, p<.001) or with radiation (9.5% vs 1.3%, OR=7.75, p<.001), surgery (2.5% vs. 0.2%, OR=15.69, p<.001) or other modality (10.8% vs. 2.2%, OR=5.36, p<.001). Federally sponsored trials were also more commonly dose de-escalation trials and trials conducted in rare cancers and in children. Conclusions: Early-phase, multi-modality, dose-deescalation, rare cancer, and child-focused drug and biological agent cancer clinical trials were more likely to be conducted by federally sponsored research groups. These findings highlight the unique role of federally funded studies in cancer clinical trials. Decreases in federal funding may hinder progress in cancer outcomes. Characteristics of federal- versus industry-sponsored cancer clinical trials. Federal Industry Odds ratio (Fed/Ind) P-value Study Characteristic Category N=1269 % N=7292 % Phase 1 or 2 1149 90.5 5905 81.0 2.25 <.001 3 115 9.1 1319 18.1 0.45 <.001 Intervention Single agent Biological (B) 86 6.8 630 8.6 0.77 .03 Single agent Drug (D) 590 46.5 5842 80.1 0.22 <.001 D & B 288 22.7 545 7.5 3.63 <.001 D/B & Radiation 120 9.5 97 1.3 7.75 <.001 D/B & Surgery 32 2.5 12 0.2 15.69 <.001 D/B, Surgery & Radiation 16 1.3 5 0.1 18.61 <.001 D/B and other modality 1 137 10.8 161 2.2 5.36 <.001 Dose de-escalation Yes 20 1.6 46

JCO Oncology PracticeVol. 21(10_suppl)
Columbia University Irving Medical Center (US), Fred Hutch Cancer Center (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 17%
Biomedical Ethics and Regulation
1.16
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.