Uncertainty and novel clinical trial designs in oncology – when should equipoise matter?

Equipoise is usually considered a requirement for the ethical conduct of phase III randomised controlled trials. Notwithstanding theoretical critiques since the concept's initial proposal, equipoise has remained an important moral consideration. In oncology, many research questions are now pursued via clinical trial designs that diverge in various ways from conventional, fixed-design, two-arm randomised controlled trials. In this article, we outline the challenges that these new designs pose for implementing equipoise. Specifically, we consider challenges posed by trials incorporating seamless designs, 'immortal' trials, and trials incorporating adaptive techniques. While we note that equipoise retains a central role in the ethical evaluation of conventional randomised controlled trials, we contend that its utility as a moral construct is challenged by more recent, 'novel randomised controlled trial' designs. Consequently, other ethical tools become important in considering the different types of risk that trial participants are exposed to in modern clinical trial designs.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Clinical Trials
Published
2026-09-11
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/17407745261469887
Primary Topic
Ethics in Clinical Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
article

Uncertainty and novel clinical trial designs in oncology – when should equipoise matter?

Sarah Heynemann, Jennifer Philip, Wendy Lipworth, Sue‐Anne McLachlan et al.
Clinical Trials
Ethics in Clinical Research
article

Uncertainty and novel clinical trial designs in oncology – when should equipoise matter?

Sarah Heynemann, Jennifer Philip, Wendy Lipworth, Sue‐Anne McLachlan, T. John, Ian Kerridge
article en

Abstract

Equipoise is usually considered a requirement for the ethical conduct of phase III randomised controlled trials. Notwithstanding theoretical critiques since the concept's initial proposal, equipoise has remained an important moral consideration. In oncology, many research questions are now pursued via clinical trial designs that diverge in various ways from conventional, fixed-design, two-arm randomised controlled trials. In this article, we outline the challenges that these new designs pose for implementing equipoise. Specifically, we consider challenges posed by trials incorporating seamless designs, 'immortal' trials, and trials incorporating adaptive techniques. While we note that equipoise retains a central role in the ethical evaluation of conventional randomised controlled trials, we contend that its utility as a moral construct is challenged by more recent, 'novel randomised controlled trial' designs. Consequently, other ethical tools become important in considering the different types of risk that trial participants are exposed to in modern clinical trial designs.

Clinical Trials
The University of Sydney (AU), The University of Melbourne (AU), Northern Health (AU), Royal North Shore Hospital (AU), Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre (AU), St Vincent's Hospital Melbourne (AU), RMIT University (AU), Macquarie University (AU)
National Health and Medical Research Council
Openalex Percentile: Top 9%
Ethics in Clinical Research
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.

Uncertainty and novel clinical trial designs in oncology – when should equipoise matter? — Sarah Heynemann, Jennifer Philip, et al. · Clinical Trials (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS