{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,5,12]],"date-time":"2026-05-12T00:06:13Z","timestamp":1778544373711,"version":"3.51.4"},"reference-count":17,"publisher":"Springer Science and Business Media LLC","issue":"1","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2021,9,26]],"date-time":"2021-09-26T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1632614400000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"},{"start":{"date-parts":[[2021,9,26]],"date-time":"2021-09-26T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1632614400000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"}],"funder":[{"DOI":"10.13039\/501100000265","name":"Medical Research Council","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","award":["UU 12023\/24"],"award-info":[{"award-number":["UU 12023\/24"]}],"id":[{"id":"10.13039\/501100000265","id-type":"DOI","asserted-by":"publisher"}]}],"content-domain":{"domain":["link.springer.com"],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["Trials"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2021,12]]},"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Background<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>A promising approach to reduce the increasing costs of clinical trials is the use of routinely collected health data as participant data. However, the quality of this data could limit its usability as trial participant data.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Methods<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>The BOSS trial is a randomised controlled trial comparing regular endoscopies versus endoscopies at need in patients with Barrett\u2019s oesophagus with primary endpoint death. Data on death and cancer collected every 2 years after randomisation (trial-specific data) were compared to data received annually (all patients on one date) from the routinely collected health data source National Health Service (NHS) Digital. We investigated completeness, agreement and timeliness and looked at the implications for the primary trial outcome. Completeness and agreement were assessed by evaluating the number of reported and missing cases and any disparities between reported dates. Timeliness was considered by graphing the year a death was first reported in the trial-specific data against that for NHS Digital data. Implications on the primary trial outcome, overall survival, of using one of the data sources alone were investigated using Kaplan-Meier graphs. To assess the utility of cause of death and cancer diagnoses, oesophageal cancer cases were compared.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Results<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>NHS Digital datasets included more deaths and often reported them sooner than the trial-specific data. The number reported as being from oesophageal cancer was similar in both datasets. Due to time lag in reporting and missing cases, the event rate appeared higher using the NHS Digital data.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Conclusion<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>NHS Digital death data is useful for calculating overall survival where trial-specific follow-up is only every 2 years from randomisation and the follow-up requires patient response. The cancer data was not a large enough sample to assess usability. We suggest that this assessment of registry data is done for more phase III RCTs and for more registry data to get a more complete picture of when RCHD would be useful in phase III RCT.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Trial registration<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>\n                      <jats:ext-link xmlns:xlink=\"http:\/\/www.w3.org\/1999\/xlink\" ext-link-type=\"uri\" xlink:href=\"https:\/\/clinicaltrials.gov\/ct2\/show\/NCT00987857\">ISRCTN54190466<\/jats:ext-link>\n                      (BOSS) 1 Oct 2009.\n                    <\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1186\/s13063-021-05613-x","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2021,9,26]],"date-time":"2021-09-26T10:06:30Z","timestamp":1632650790000},"update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/springer_crossmark_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":5,"title":["Use of routinely collected health data in randomised clinical trials: comparison of trial-specific death data in the BOSS trial with NHS Digital data"],"prefix":"10.1186","volume":"22","author":[{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0002-6695-5390","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Sharon B.","family":"Love","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0001-5328-6274","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Anna","family":"Kilanowski","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0002-6465-7330","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Victoria","family":"Yorke-Edwards","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Oliver","family":"Old","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Hugh","family":"Barr","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Clive","family":"Stokes","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Catherine","family":"Kendall","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0002-9323-1371","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Matthew R.","family":"Sydes","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]}],"member":"297","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2021,9,26]]},"reference":[{"issue":"5","key":"5613_CR1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"307","DOI":"10.1038\/nrd.2017.65","volume":"16","author":"KA Getz","year":"2017","unstructured":"Getz KA, Campo RA. Trial watch: trends in clinical trial design complexity. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2017;16(5):307. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1038\/nrd.2017.65.","journal-title":"Nat Rev Drug Discov."},{"issue":"17","key":"5613_CR2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1579","DOI":"10.1056\/NEJMp1310102","volume":"369","author":"MS Lauer","year":"2013","unstructured":"Lauer MS, D\u2019Agostino RB. The randomized registry trial - the next disruptive technology in clinical research? N Engl J Med. 2013;369(17):1579\u201381. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1056\/NEJMp1310102.","journal-title":"N Engl J Med."},{"issue":"6","key":"5613_CR3","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1042","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ahj.2010.08.040","volume":"160","author":"O Fr\u00f6bert","year":"2010","unstructured":"Fr\u00f6bert O, Lagerqvist B, Gudnason T, Thuesen L, Svensson R, Olivecrona GK. u. a. Thrombus Aspiration in ST-Elevation myocardial infarction in Scandinavia (TASTE trial). A multicenter, prospective, randomized, controlled clinical registry trial based on the Swedish angiography and angioplasty registry (SCAAR) platform. Study design and. Am Heart J. 2010;160(6):1042\u20138. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.ahj.2010.08.040.","journal-title":"Am Heart J."},{"key":"5613_CR4","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"312","DOI":"10.1038\/nrcardio.2015.33","volume":"12","author":"S James","year":"2015","unstructured":"James S, Rao SV, Granger CB. Registry-based randomized clinical trials\u2014a new clinical trial paradigm. Nat Rev Cardiol. 2015;12:312.","journal-title":"Nat Rev Cardiol"},{"issue":"2","key":"5613_CR5","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"O15","DOI":"10.1186\/1745-6215-16-S2-O15","volume":"16","author":"S Bond","year":"2015","unstructured":"Bond S, Payne R, Wilson E, Chowdry A, Caskey F, Wheeler D, et al. Using the UK renal registry for a clinical trial in dialysis patients: the example of SIMPLIFIED. Trials. 2015;16(2):O15.","journal-title":"Trials"},{"issue":"4","key":"5613_CR6","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"365","DOI":"10.3109\/02841869409098430","volume":"33","author":"L Teppo","year":"1994","unstructured":"Teppo L, Pukkala E, Lehtonen M. Data quality and quality control of a population-based cancer registry: experience in Finland. Acta Oncol. 1994;33(4):365\u20139.","journal-title":"Acta Oncol"},{"issue":"4","key":"5613_CR7","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"381","DOI":"10.1080\/028418602760169442","volume":"41","author":"P Korhonen","year":"2002","unstructured":"Korhonen P, Malila N, Pukkala E, Teppo L, Albanes D, Virtamo J. The Finnish Cancer Registry as follow-up source of a large trial cohort. Acta Oncol. 2002;41(4):381\u20138.","journal-title":"Acta Oncol"},{"issue":"7","key":"5613_CR8","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1218","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ejca.2008.10.037","volume":"45","author":"IK Larsen","year":"2009","unstructured":"Larsen IK, Sm\u00e5stuen M, Johannesen TB, Langmark F, Parkin DM, Bray F, et al. Data quality at the Cancer Registry of Norway: an overview of comparability, completeness, validity and timeliness. Eur J Cancer. 2009;45(7):1218\u201331. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.ejca.2008.10.037.","journal-title":"Eur J Cancer."},{"issue":"1","key":"5613_CR9","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"139","DOI":"10.1186\/s13063-018-2535-5","volume":"19","author":"S Treweek","year":"2018","unstructured":"Treweek S, Bevan S, Bower P, Campbell M, Christie J, Clarke M, et al. Trial Forge Guidance 1: what is a Study Within A Trial (SWAT)? Trials. 2018;19(1):139. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/s13063-018-2535-5.","journal-title":"Trials."},{"issue":"5","key":"5613_CR10","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"747","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ejca.2008.11.032","volume":"45","author":"F Bray","year":"2009","unstructured":"Bray F, Parkin DM. Evaluation of data quality in the cancer registry: principles and methods. Part I: comparability, validity and timeliness. Eur J Cancer. 2009;45(5):747\u201355. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.ejca.2008.11.032.","journal-title":"Eur J Cancer."},{"issue":"5","key":"5613_CR11","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"756","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ejca.2008.11.033","volume":"45","author":"DM Parkin","year":"2009","unstructured":"Parkin DM, Bray F. Evaluation of data quality in the cancer registry: principles and methods Part II. Completeness. Eur J Cancer. 2009;45(5):756\u201364. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.ejca.2008.11.033.","journal-title":"Eur J Cancer"},{"key":"5613_CR12","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"158","DOI":"10.1177\/0969141315575052","volume":"22","author":"O Old","year":"2015","unstructured":"Old O, Moayyedi P, Love S, Roberts C, Hapeshi J, Foy C, et al. Barrett\u2019s Oesophagus Surveillance versus endoscopy at need Study (BOSS): protocol and analysis plan for a multicentre randomized controlled trial. J Med Screen. 2015;22:158\u2013164 S.","journal-title":"J Med Screen"},{"key":"5613_CR13","unstructured":"NHS Digital. Mortality Data Review. NHS Digital; June 2020, https:\/\/nhs-prod.global.ssl.fastly.net\/binaries\/content\/assets\/website-assets\/coronavirus\/mortality-data-review\/nhs-digital-mortality-data-review.pdf. (accessed 11June 2021)."},{"key":"5613_CR14","unstructured":"Office for National Statistics (ONS). User guide to mortality statistics. ONS; 28 September 2020, https:\/\/www.ons.gov.uk\/peoplepopulationandcommunity\/birthsdeathsandmarriages\/deaths\/methodologies\/userguidetomortalitystatisticsjuly2017\/pdf (accessed 11June 2021)."},{"key":"5613_CR15","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Barry SJE, Dinnett E, Kean S, Gaw A, Ford I. Are routinely collected NHS administrative records suitable for endpoint identification in clinical trials? Evidence from the West of Scotland Coronary Prevention Study. PLoS One. 2013;8(9). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1371\/journal.pone.0075379.","DOI":"10.1371\/journal.pone.0075379"},{"issue":"Suppl 2","key":"5613_CR16","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"P61","DOI":"10.1186\/1745-6215-16-S2-P61","volume":"16","author":"W Herrington","year":"2015","unstructured":"Herrington W, Wallendszus K, Bowman L. Can vascular mortality be reliably ascertained from the underlying cause of death recorded on a medical death certificate? Evidence from the 2800 adjudicated heart protection study deaths. Trials. 2015;16(Suppl 2):P61. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/1745-6215-16-S2-P61.","journal-title":"Trials"},{"key":"5613_CR17","unstructured":"SWAT 125: Comparison of trial-collected and routinely-collected death data [Available from: https:\/\/www.qub.ac.uk\/sites\/TheNorthernIrelandNetworkforTrialsMethodologyResearch\/FileStore\/Filetoupload,976743,en.pdf] Accessed 29 July 2020."}],"container-title":["Trials"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1186\/s13063-021-05613-x.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/article\/10.1186\/s13063-021-05613-x\/fulltext.html","content-type":"text\/html","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1186\/s13063-021-05613-x.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2021,9,26]],"date-time":"2021-09-26T10:07:30Z","timestamp":1632650850000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/trialsjournal.biomedcentral.com\/articles\/10.1186\/s13063-021-05613-x"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2021,9,26]]},"references-count":17,"journal-issue":{"issue":"1","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2021,12]]}},"alternative-id":["5613"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/s13063-021-05613-x","relation":{"has-preprint":[{"id-type":"doi","id":"10.21203\/rs.3.rs-58166\/v1","asserted-by":"object"}]},"ISSN":["1745-6215"],"issn-type":[{"value":"1745-6215","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2021,9,26]]},"assertion":[{"value":"12 August 2020","order":1,"name":"received","label":"Received","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"8 September 2021","order":2,"name":"accepted","label":"Accepted","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"26 September 2021","order":3,"name":"first_online","label":"First Online","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"order":1,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Declarations"}},{"value":"The BOSS trial was approved by the UCLH Research Ethics Committee Alpha in 2008 and approvals from all hosting NHS organisations for each site were collected. The flagging in the NHS Digital system and following data collection was already included in the first informed consent. The approval for the use of trial data in this study was given by the Chief Investigator and the Data Monitoring Committee.","order":2,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Ethics approval and consent to participate"}},{"value":"Not applicable.","order":3,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Consent for publication"}},{"value":"MS reports grants and non-financial support from Astellas, grants from Clovis, grants and non-financial support from Janssen, grants and non-financial support from Novartis, grants and non-financial support from Sanofi, grants and non-financial support from Sanofi, personal fees from Lilly Oncology and personal fees from Janssen, outside the submitted work. HB and CK report the NIHR HTA grant for the BOSS trial. The remaining authors declare that they have no competing interests.","order":4,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Competing interests"}}],"article-number":"654"}}