Characteristics, Progression, and Output of Randomized Platform Trials: A Systematic Review.

Importance: Platform trials have become increasingly common, and evidence is needed to determine how this trial design is actually applied in current research practice. Objective: To determine the characteristics, progression, and output of randomized platform trials. Evidence Review: In this systematic review of randomized platform trials, Medline, Embase, Scopus, trial registries, gray literature, and preprint servers were searched, and citation tracking was performed in July 2022. Investigators were contacted in February 2023 to confirm data accuracy and to provide updated information on the status of platform trial arms. Randomized platform trials were eligible if they explicitly planned to add or drop arms. Data were extracted in duplicate from protocols, publications, websites, and registry entries. For each platform trial, design features such as the use of a common control arm, use of nonconcurrent control data, statistical framework, adjustment for multiplicity, and use of additional adaptive design features were collected. Progression and output of each platform trial were determined by the recruitment status of individual arms, the number of arms added or dropped, and the availability of results for each intervention arm. Findings: The search identified 127 randomized platform trials with a total of 823 arms; most trials were conducted in the field of oncology (57 [44.9%]) and COVID-19 (45 [35.4%]). After a more than twofold increase in the initiation of new platform trials at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, the number of platform trials has since declined. Platform trial features were often not reported (not reported: nonconcurrent control, 61 of 127 [48.0%]; multiplicity adjustment for arms, 98 of 127 [77.2%]; statistical framework, 37 of 127 [29.1%]). Adaptive design features were only used by half the studies (63 of 127 [49.6%]). Results were available for 65.2% of closed arms (230 of 353). Premature closure of platform trial arms due to recruitment problems was infrequent (5 of 353 [1.4%]). Conclusions and Relevance: This systematic review found that platform trials were initiated most frequently during the COVID-19 pandemic and declined thereafter. The reporting of platform features and the availability of results were insufficient. Premature arm closure for poor recruitment was rare.

Investigating the (Mis)Match between Natural Pest Control Knowledge and the Intensity of Pesticide Use.

Transforming modern agriculture towards both higher yields and greater sustainability is critical for preserving biodiversity in an increasingly populous and variable world. However, the intensity of agricultural practices varies strongly between crop systems. Given limited research capacity, it is crucial to focus efforts to increase sustainability in the crop systems that need it most. In this study, we investigate the match (or mismatch) between the intensity of pesticide use and the availability of knowledge on the ecosystem service of natural pest control across various crop systems. Using a systematic literature search on pest control and publicly available pesticide data, we find that pest control literature is not more abundant in crops where insecticide input per hectare is highest. Instead, pest control literature is most abundant, with the highest number of studies published, in crops with comparatively low insecticide input per hectare but with high world harvested area. These results suggest that a major increase of interest in agroecological research towards crops with high insecticide input, particularly cotton and horticultural crops such as citrus and high value-added vegetables, would help meet knowledge needs for a timely ecointensification of agriculture.