Challenges and Opportunities in Developing an Oncology Clinical Trial Network in the United States Veterans Affairs Health Care System: The VA STARPORT Experience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The United States Veterans Affairs (VA) Health Care System has a strong history of conducting impactful oncology randomized clinical trials (RCTs). We developed a phase II/III RCT to test the use of metastasis-directed therapy in Veterans with oligometastatic prostate cancer (OMPC)-the first VA RCT in OMPC that leverages novel imaging and advanced radiotherapy techniques. To accomplish this, we developed a clinical trial network to conduct the study. In this manuscript, we describe several challenges we encountered in study development/conduct and our strategies to address them, with the goal of helping investigators establish robust study networks to conduct clinical trials. In the study start-up, we encountered challenges in timely site activation, and leveraged project management to maximize efficiency. Additionally, there were several changes in the clinical paradigms in imaging and treatment that led to protocol amendments to ensure maximum equipoise, recruitment, and impact of the study. Specifically, we amended the trial to add de novo OMPC patients (from initially only recurrent OMPC) and expanded the study to allow up to 10 metastases (from initially five). Finally, in order to maintain local study team engagement, we developed initiatives to maximize collaboration and add value to the overall clinical program through study participation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.563 | 0.416 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.024 | 0.017 |
| Open science | 0.010 | 0.027 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.022 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".