Background Data Monitoring Committees (DMCs) are increasingly involved in the conduct of randomized controlled trials, but there is little documented evidence of what they do. Three interlinked surveys were carried out as part of the DAMOCLES project to explore recent and current DMC practice and policy.
Methods 1) A questionnaire about DMC practice was sent to sample of 45 authors of trials published in selected journals in 2000. The sample was stratified by centre (single/multiple), disease area, and presence of DMC. 2) A sample of investigators in trials ongoing in the United Kingdom in 2001–02 was also sent a questionnaire about DMC practice. The sample was drawn from trials funded by the Medical Research Council, the United Kingdom Department of Health's Health Technology Assessment Programme, and a local and a multicentre research ethics committee. The sample was additionally stratified by funder (public/industry), centre (single/ multiple), and disease area. 3) A sample of major organisations involved in randomised controlled trials was sent a questionnaire about DMC policies.
Results Information about DMC practice from the first survey was obtained from 31 trials (69%), of which four had a DMC. Information about DMC practice from the second survey was obtained about 36 trials (90%), of which 20 had a DMC. Information about DMC policy from the third survey was obtained from 25 out of 25 organisations. There was general agreement about the sorts of trials particularly needing independent DMCs, but there were few uniform approaches to their modes of functioning, and few of the organisations surveyed had developed formal policies. Conclusions The roles of existing DMCs and policies governing DMC functioning vary widely across trials and organisations that sponsor or oversee trials, both within the UK and internationally. These findings reinforce previous calls for development of such policies across a wider range of organisations, better means to monitor their implementation within trials, and wider use of structured “charters”, which set out DMC modus operandi in advance.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
1. Ellenberg S, Fleming T, DeMets D. Data monitoring committees in clinical trials: a practical perspective. Chichester: John Wiley and Sons Ltd, 2002.
2.
2. Hawkins BS. Data monitoring committees for multicenter clinical trials sponsored by the National Institutes of Health. I. Roles and membership of data monitoring committees for trials sponsored by the National Eye Institute. Controlled Clinical Trials1991; 12: 424–437.
3.
3. Geller NL, Stylianou M. Practical issues in data monitoring of clinical trials: summary of responses to a questionnaire at NIH. Statistics in Medicine1993; 12: 543–551.
4.
4. George SL. A survey of monitoring practices in cancer clinical trials. Statistics in Medicine1993; 12: 435–450.
5.
5. Grant AM, Sydes M, McLeer S et al. Issues in data monitoring and interim analysis of trials (the DAMOCLES study). Health Technology Assessment, in press.
6.
6. Sydes MR, Spiegelhalter DJ, Altman DG, Babiker AB, Parmar MKB and the DAMOCLES group. Systematic review of Data Monitoring Committees in Randomised Controlled Trials. Clinical Trials2004; 1: 60–79.
7.
7. Walker AE, McLeer SK and the DAMOCLES group. Small group processes relevant to Data Monitoring Committees: an overview of reviews. Clinical Trials2004; 1: 282–296.
8.
8. Sydes MR, Altman DG, Babiker AB, Parmar MKB, Spiegelhalter DJ and the DAMOCLES group. Reported Use of Data Monitoring Committees in the Main Published Reports of Randomised Controlled Trials: A Cross-sectional Study. Clinical Trials2004; 1: 48–59.
9.
9. Medical Research Council. MRC guidelines for good clinical practice in clinical trials. London: MRC, 1998.
10.
10. Kiri A, Tonascia S, Meinert CL. The relationship between treatment effects monitoring in clinical trials and early stops. Clinical Trials2004; 1: 40–47.
11.
11. Ellenberg SS, George SL.Shouldstatisticians reporting to data monitoring committees be independent of the trial sponsor and leadership?Statistics in Medicine2004, 23: 1503–1005.
12.
12. DeMets DL, Fleming TR. The independent statistician for data monitoring committees. Statistics in Medicine2004; 23: 1513–1517.
13.
13. Lachin JM. Conflicts of interest in data monitoring of industry versus publicly financed clinical trials. Statistics in Medicine2004; 23: 1519–1521.
14.
14. Siegel JP, O'Neill RT, Temple R, Campbell G, Foulkes MA. Independence of the statistician who analyses unblinded data. Statistics in Medicine2004; 23: 1527–1529.
15.
15. Pocock SJ. A major trial needs three statisticians: why, how and who?Statistics in Medicine2004; 23: 1535–1539.
17. US Food and Drug Administration. Guidance for clinical trial sponsors on the establishment and operation of clinical trial data monitoring committees. Rockville, MD: FDA, November 2001. http://www.fda.gov/cber/gdlns/clindatmon.htm Accessed 15 September 2004.
18.
18. Meinert CL. Clinical trials and treatment effects monitoring. Control Clin Trials1998; 19: 515–522.
20. Siebert C, Clark CM Jr.Operationalandpolicy considerations of data monitoring in clinical trials: the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial experience. Control Clin Trials1993; 14: 30–44.
21.
21. Grant AM, Altman DG, Babiker AB et al. A proposed charter for clinical trial data monitoring committees: helping them to do their job well. Lancet, in press.
