Quantitative evaluation of the impact of relaxing eligibility criteria on the risk–benefit profile of drugs for lung cancer based on real‐world data.

Introduction: Restrictive eligibility criteria in cancer drug trials result in low enrollment rates and limited population diversity. Relaxed eligibility criteria (REC) based on solid evidence is becoming necessary for stakeholders worldwide. However, the absence of high‐quality, favorable evidence remains a major challenge. This study presents a protocol to quantitatively evaluate the impact of relaxing eligibility criteria in common non‐small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) protocols in China, on the risk–benefit profile. This involves a detailed explanation of the rationale, framework, and design of REC. Methods: To evaluate our REC in NSCLC drug trials, we will first construct a structured, cross‐dimensional real‐world NSCLC database using deep learning methods. We will then establish randomized virtual cohorts and perform benefit–risk assessment using Monte Carlo simulation and propensity matching. Shapley value will be utilized to quantitatively measure the effect of the change of each eligibility criterion on patient volume, clinical efficacy and safety. Discussion: This study is one of the few that focuses on the problem of overly stringent eligibility criteria cancer drug clinical trials, providing quantitative evaluation of the effect of relaxing each NSCLC eligibility criterion. This study will not only provide scientific evidence for the rational design of population inclusion in lung cancer clinical trials, but also establish a data governance system, as well as a REC evaluation framework that can be generalized to other cancer studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]