document_title: Corn production in the United States

question_text: where is the majority of sweet corn grown

text: Corn production in the United States

text: History[edit]

text: Corn spread across North America a few thousand years ago.[2] The original corn plant known as teosinte is still grown in Mexico. Newer varieties are much larger, due to efforts of Native Americans and scientific research. It is now the third leading grain crop in the world.[3]

text: By the time scientific assessment of conduciveness to grow corn in the United States was undertaken by Meriwether Lewis in 1804, the immigrant settlers had already spread its growth in many parts of the country due to its suitability in varying climatic and soil conditions. Once the suitability of land in the central part of the country, the Midwestern United States, was scientifically established as fertile and rich by Lewis and Clark, settlers moved to the area in large numbers and started growing large corn crops, reaping large benefits.

text: Over the centuries, the crop varieties underwent changes to get better yields while farming methods were improved. As a result, the fertile belt soon came to be known as "the Corn Belt". Hybrid cropping techniques were widely practiced from the late 1880s, and the hybrid varieties developed with cross and re-cross breeding techniques developed by university research. This ushered a new age of agriculture. The 1% area devoted to hybrid varieties in 1934 rose to 78% in the 1940s and continued to rise thereafter. In the 1950s, Henry A. Wallace, former Vice President and former Secretary of Agriculture, and an early developer of hybrid seeds, observed that "the Corn Belt had developed into the most productive agricultural civilization the world has ever seen." This trend has continued and now the corn production level in American farms is a significant 20% higher per acre than in the rest of the world.[4]

text: As the growth of corn has spread to extensive production in 14 states (though it is grown to a lesser extent in all the other US states), a coalition of farmers associations in all these states has been established. This association is known as the Corn Farmers Coalition, which is a union of the National Corn Growers Association and 14 state corn associations (including Iowa Corn).[5]

text: Production[edit]

text: The total production of corn in the US for the year 2013-14 is reported to be 13.016 billion bushels of which the major use is for manufacture of ethanol and its co-product (Distillers' Dried Grains with Solubles) accounting for 37% (27% + 10%) or 4,845 million bushels (3,552 + 1,293). The other uses are given in the table.[6]

text:
Uses of Corn/Maize

Type
Amount (Million Bushels)
Percentage

Ethanol
3552
27

DDGS
1293
10

Livestock Feed
4345
33

Dairy
823
6

Beef cattle
1213
9

Hogs
1004
8

Poultry
1205
9

Other animals
100
1

Exports
1450
11

Other processing*
1420
11

Residual Use
1055
8

Total
13016
100

Million Bushels & Percentage.[6]

text: 'Other processing' includes the production of High Fructose Corn Syrup, sweeteners, starch, beverage alcohol, and

text: cereals.

text:
Sweetcorn, yellow, raw
(seeds only)

Nutritional value per 100 g (3.5 oz)

Energy
360 kJ (86 kcal)

Carbohydrates

18.7 g

Starch
5.7 g

Sugars
6.26 g

Dietary fiber
2 g

Fat

1.35 g

Protein

3.27 g

Tryptophan
0.023 g

Threonine
0.129 g

Isoleucine
0.129 g

Leucine
0.348 g

Lysine
0.137 g

Methionine
0.067 g

Cystine
0.026 g

Phenylalanine
0.150 g

Tyrosine
0.123 g

Valine
0.185 g

Arginine
0.131 g

Histidine
0.089 g

Alanine
0.295 g

Aspartic acid
00.244 g

Glutamic acid
00.636 g

Glycine
0.127 g

Proline
00.292 g

Serine
00.153 g

Vitamins

Vitamin A equiv.
lutein zeaxanthin

(1%)
9 μg
644 μg

Thiamine (B1)

(13%)
0.155 mg

Riboflavin (B2)

(5%)
0.055 mg

Niacin (B3)

(12%)
1.77 mg

Pantothenic acid (B5)

(14%)
0.717 mg

Vitamin B6

(7%)
0.093 mg

Folate (B9)

(11%)
42 μg

Vitamin C

(8%)
6.8 mg

Minerals

Iron

(4%)
0.52 mg

Magnesium

(10%)
37 mg

Manganese

(8%)
0.163 mg

Phosphorus

(13%)
89 mg

Potassium

(6%)
270 mg

Zinc

(5%)
0.46 mg

Other constituents

Water
75.96 g

Link to USDA Database entry
One ear of medium size (6-3/4" to 7-1/2" long)
maize has 90 grams of seeds

Units
μg = micrograms • mg = milligrams
IU = International units

Percentages are roughly approximated using US recommendations for adults.
Source: USDA Nutrient Database

text: The final estimate of corn production for the years 1950 to 1959 in the United States is given as some three billion bushels and in recent years, some nine billion bushels are produced each year.[2] Corn growth is dominated by west north central Iowa and east central Illinois.[7] In 2011, the national average production was 147 bushels per acre, and reported to be 20 bushels per acre more than the yield in 2002. Based on a national contest in 2011 when an average of 300 bushels per acre was achieved others are sure to follow suit which result in a yield of 300 bushels per acre by 2030 from the same extent land holdings under corn.[4][6]

text: Ethanol[edit]

text: Two methods are used to produce ethanol from corn and other plants such as sugar cane. The residual product (DDGS) is about 33% of the input stream and is used as livestock feed. Ethanol is blended with gasoline to produce E10 and E85 fuels for automobile vehicles. Its manufacture has created 400,000 jobs in the US and its environmental friendliness is recorded in the form of reduced gas emissions of 25.3 million metric tons. One bushel of corn can produce 2.8 gallons of ethanol, 17.5 lbs of livestock feed and 18 lbs of carbon dioxide.[8]

text: Some of this article's listed sources may not be reliable. Please help this article by looking for better, more reliable sources. Unreliable citations may be challenged or deleted. (September 2014) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

text: It is also reported that every acre of corn ultimately results in reducing 8 tonnes (7.9 long tons; 8.8 short tons) of greenhouse gas emission.[citation needed] On account of great demand for ethanol, corn is fetching higher prices. This has resulted in farmers increasing acreage under corn by adopting crop rotations between corn and soybeans; causing a decline in soy production. The Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 also allowed more acreage under corn, overriding the act of 1983, which had fixed it at 60,200,000 hectares (149,000,000 acres).[9]

text: Agriculture[edit]

text: There are 80,000,000 acres (32,000,000 ha) of land dedicated exclusively to corn cultivation in the United States. The United States is the world's leading producer of corn,[10] having produced 333,010,910 tonnes (327,751,510 long tons; 367,081,690 short tons) of the crop in the year 2009.[11]

text: Out of 316,000 corn farms about 300,000 farms (95% of them) are owned by families. More than 30% of corn farms are operated by women.[12][13]

text: Highest yield of over 12 billion bushels have been recorded up to 2011 with 12.4 billion bushels reported in 2011 with yields of more than 140 bushels per acre. A milestone in production in the US is that the farmers take out 20% more corn per acre than in any other part of the world.[14] Farming practice is based on irrigation only in about 11% area while the balance area is under un-irrigated conditions. The farm practices have also resulted in implementing conservation measures which have reduced soil erosion to the extent of 44%.

text: Subsidies[edit]

text: See also US Agricultural subsidies

text: Corn in the United States has been subsidized since the 1930s, when a drop in demand from post-war Europe caused a food glut and prices crashed. In the 1980s, subsidies increased substantially.[15]

text: US subsidies for corn have averaged 4.7 billion dollars per year over the twenty years from 1995-2014 inclusive.[16] 2014 projections were that the US would spend $97.29 billion/year on farm and food programs over the next decade.[17]

text: In 2014, the "direct payments" portion of subsidies was abolished, and subsidies were mostly replaced with two programs. Farmers may pick Price Loss Coverage (a guarantee that the farmer will get a certain price for their crop) and Agricultural Risk Coverage (which guarantees a certain amount of revenue).[16][15]

text: The subsidies have been criticized for:

text:
high and unpredictable expense to taxpayers
disincentivizing crop diversification and planning for extreme weather[17]
harming public health; supporting meat and processed food by subsidizing durable staples (mostly corn and soy) rather than fruit and vegetables ("specialty crops")[15]
destroying the livelihoods of small farmers in the developing world by dumping (by Oxfam, the World Bank and the International Food Policy Research Institute among others)[18]

text: Value[edit]

text: US$267 is spent by the average American annually on purchasing corn.[19] In 2015, one bushel of corn costs $3.50.[20] The value of individual corn farms varies from location to location, depending on the amount of bushels produced and the quality of corn.[21] Other factors such as the weather or economic crises may cause corn prices to fluctuate or to rise.[22][23][24] The value of corn is increasing, due to the country's greater demand and reliance for corn.[24]

text: By state[edit]

text: Iowa, the largest producer of corn in the US, grows three times as much corn as Mexico. Iowa harvested 3,548 acres (1,436 ha) of sweet corn in 2007. In 2011, the state had 92,300 corn farms on 30,700,000 acres (12,400,000 ha), the average size being 333 acres (135 ha), and the average dollar value per acre being US$6,708. In the same year, there were 13.7 million harvested acres of corn for grain, producing 2.36 billion bushels, which yielded 172.0 bu/acre, with US$14.5 billion of corn value of production.[25] Almost 1.88 billion bushels of corn were grown in the state in 2012 on 13.7 million acres of land, while the 2013 projections are 2.45 billion bushels of corn on 13.97 million acres of land.[26]

text: Nebraska is known as the "Cornhusker State" – and is the third largest corn-producing state in the United States.[27]

text: Corn is Minnesota's largest crop. In 1922-31, production averaged 30.4 bushels per acre; in 1947-56, it average 46.6 bushels per acre; in 1973, it averaged 91.4 bushels per acre; and in 1994, the average was 142 bushels per acre. In 1935-46, a shift to hybrid varieties occurred.[28] In 2010, the state produced 1.29 billion bushels.[29] In 2012, Minnesota's farmers produced the largest corn crop in the state's history, at 1.37 billion bushels harvested, equaling 165 bushels per acre, on 250,000 acres.[30]

text: The first corn varieties grown in Illinois were those obtained from local Indians or varieties brought to Illinois from the New England states. After the Civil War, varieties were developed which were adapted to the state's soils and climate, such as Reid's Yellow Dent. During the period of 1900-05, there were 10,500,000 acres planted, with a decline to 8,862,000 acres in 1925-30.[31] In 2012, Illinois sowed 12.8 million acres of corn in 2012, ranking fourth in corn production, behind Iowa, Minnesota, and Nebraska. The state averaged 105 bushels per acre in 2012, down from 157-bushel per acre in 2010 and 2011.[32]

text: Although the state of Alaska has a cold temperate, some Alaskan farmers still manage to grow corn, through means such as greenhouse farming. Corn is popular among Alaskans.[33]

text: Corn is a popular crop in the state of Indiana; it is mostly grown as animal feed.[34] Indiana is located in the United States' Corn Belt.[35]

text: The state of Texas is a great producer of corn; the final estimate of corn produced in 2010 was some 301 million bushels on 2,300,000 acres (930,000 ha) of land, totaling to $1.2 billion of crop.[36]

text: Corn was introduced to Alabama in around the eighteenth century; there have been traces of corn found in Nuyuka's Upper Creek village which dates back to the period.[37]


document_title: Clinical trial

question_text: he purpose of making a clinical study double-blind is to

question_tokens: he purpose of making a clinical study double-blind is to

root

text: Clinical trial

text: Overview[edit]

text: Trials of drugs[edit]

text: Some clinical trials involve healthy subjects with no pre-existing medical conditions. Other clinical trials pertain to patients with specific health conditions who are willing to try an experimental treatment.

tag: p

text: When participants are healthy volunteers who receive financial incentives, the goals are different than when the participants are sick. During dosing periods, study subjects typically remain under supervision for one to 40 nights.

text: Usually pilot experiments are conducted to gain insights for design of the clinical trial to follow.

text: There are two goals to testing medical treatments: to learn whether they work well enough, called "efficacy" or "effectiveness"; and to learn whether they are safe enough, called "safety". Neither is an absolute criterion; both safety and efficacy are evaluated relative to how the treatment is intended to be used, what other treatments are available, and the severity of the disease or condition. The benefits must outweigh the risks.[4][5]:8 For example, many drugs to treat cancer have severe side effects that would not be acceptable for an over-the-counter pain medication, yet the cancer drugs have been approved since they are used under a physician's care, and are used for a life-threatening condition.[6]

text: In the US, the elderly constitute only 14 percent of the population, while they consume over one-third of drugs.[7] People over 55 (or a similar cutoff age) are often excluded from trials because their greater health issues and drug use complicate data interpretation, and because they have different physiological capacity than younger people. Women, children and people with unrelated medical conditions are also frequently excluded.[8] For women, a major reason for exclusion is the possibility of pregnancy and the unknown risks to the fetus.

text: The sponsor designs the trial in coordination with a panel of expert clinical investigators, including what alternative or existing treatments to compare to the new drug and what type(s) of patients might benefit. If the sponsor cannot obtain enough test subjects at one location investigators at other locations are recruited to join the study.

text: During the trial, investigators recruit subjects with the predetermined characteristics, administer the treatment(s) and collect data on the subjects' health for a defined time period. Data include measurements such as vital signs, concentration of the study drug in the blood or tissues, changes to symptoms, and whether improvement or worsening of the condition targeted by the study drug occurs. The researchers send the data to the trial sponsor, who then analyzes the pooled data using statistical tests.

text: Examples of clinical trial goals include assessing the safety and relative effectiveness of a medication or device:

text:
On a specific kind of patient, for example, a patient who has been diagnosed with Alzheimer's disease
At varying dosages, for example, a 10 milligram dose instead of a 5 milligram dose
For a new indication
Evaluation for improved efficacy in treating a patient's condition as compared to the standard therapy for that condition
Evaluation of the study drug or device relative to two or more already approved/common interventions for that condition, for example, device A versus device B, or therapy A versus therapy B)

tag: ul

text: While most clinical trials test one alternative to the novel intervention, some expand to three or four and may include a placebo.

text: Except for small, single-location trials, the design and objectives are specified in a document called a clinical trial protocol. The protocol is the trial's "operating manual" and ensures that all researchers perform the trial in the same way on similar subjects and that the data is comparable across all subjects.

text: As a trial is designed to test hypotheses and rigorously monitor and assess outcomes, it can be seen as an application of the scientific method, specifically the experimental step.

text: The most common clinical trials evaluate new pharmaceutical products, medical devices (such as a new catheter), biologics, psychological therapies, or other interventions. Clinical trials may be required before a national regulatory authority[9] approves marketing of the innovation.

text: Trials of devices[edit]

text: Similarly to drugs, manufacturers of medical devices in the United States are required to conduct clinical trials for premarket approval.[10] Device trials may compare a new device to an established therapy, or may compare similar devices to each other. An example of the former in the field of vascular surgery is the Open versus Endovascular Repair (OVER trial) for the treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysm, which compared the older open aortic repair technique to the newer endovascular aneurysm repair device.[11] An example of the latter are clinical trials on mechanical devices used in the management of adult female urinary incontinence.[12]

text: Trials of procedures[edit]

text: Similarly to drugs, medical or surgical procedures may be subjected to clinical trials,[13] such as case-controlled studies for surgical interventions.[14]

text: History[edit]

text: The concepts behind clinical trials are ancient. The Book of Daniel chapter 1, verses 12 through 15, for instance, describes a planned experiment with both baseline and follow-up observations of two groups who either partook of, or did not partake of, "the King's meat" over a trial period of ten days. Persian physician Avicenna, in The Canon of Medicine (1025) gave similar advice for determining the efficacy of medical drugs and substances.[15]

text: Development[edit]

text: Although early medical experimentation was often performed, the use of a control group to provide an accurate comparison for the demonstration of the intervention's efficacy, was generally lacking. For instance, Lady Mary Wortley Montagu, who campaigned for the introduction of inoculation (then called variolation) to prevent smallpox, arranged for seven prisoners who had been sentenced to death to undergo variolation in exchange for their life. Although they survived and did not contract smallpox, there was no control group to assess whether this result was due to the inoculation or some other factor. Similar experiments performed by Edward Jenner over his smallpox vaccine were equally conceptually flawed.[15]

text: The first proper clinical trial was conducted by the physician James Lind.[16] The disease scurvy, now known to be caused by a Vitamin C deficiency, would often have terrible effects on the welfare of the crew of long distance ocean voyages. In 1740, the catastrophic result of Anson's circumnavigation attracted much attention in Europe; out of 1900 men, 1400 had died, most of them allegedly from having contracted scurvy.[17] John Woodall, an English military surgeon of the British East India Company, had recommended the consumption of citrus fruit (it has an antiscorbutic effect) from the 17th century, but their use did not become widespread.[18]

text: Lind conducted the first systematic clinical trial in 1747.[19] He included a dietary supplement of an acidic quality in the experiment after two months at sea, when the ship was already afflicted with scurvy. He divided twelve scorbutic sailors into six groups of two. They all received the same diet but, in addition, group one was given a quart of cider daily, group two twenty-five drops of elixir of vitriol (sulfuric acid), group three six spoonfuls of vinegar, group four half a pint of seawater, group five received two oranges and one lemon, and the last group a spicy paste plus a drink of barley water. The treatment of group five stopped after six days when they ran out of fruit, but by that time one sailor was fit for duty while the other had almost recovered. Apart from that, only group one also showed some effect of its treatment.[20]

text: After 1750 the discipline began to take its modern shape.[21][22] John Haygarth demonstrated the importance of a control group for the correct identification of the placebo effect in his celebrated study of the ineffective remedy called Perkin's tractors. Further work in that direction was carried out by the eminent physician Sir William Gull, 1st Baronet in the 1860s.[15]

text: Frederick Akbar Mahomed (d. 1884), who worked at Guy's Hospital in London, made substantial contributions to the process of clinical trials, where "he separated chronic nephritis with secondary hypertension from what we now term essential hypertension. He also founded the Collective Investigation Record for the British Medical Association; this organization collected data from physicians practicing outside the hospital setting and was the precursor of modern collaborative clinical trials."[23]

text: Modern trials[edit]

text: Sir Ronald A. Fisher, while working for the Rothamsted experimental station in the field of agriculture, developed his Principles of experimental design in the 1920s as an accurate methodology for the proper design of experiments. Among his major ideas, was the importance of randomization – the random assignment of individuals to different groups for the experiment;[24] replication – to reduce uncertainty, measurements should be repeated and experiments replicated to identify sources of variation;[25] blocking – to arrange experimental units into groups of units that are similar to each other, and thus reducing irrelevant sources of variation; use of factorial experiments – efficient at evaluating the effects and possible interactions of several independent factors.[15]

text: The British Medical Research Council officially recognized the importance of clinical trials from the 1930s. The Council established the Therapeutic Trials Committee to advise and assist in the arrangement of properly controlled clinical trials on new products that seem likely on experimental grounds to have value in the treatment of disease.[15]

text: The first randomised curative trial was carried out at the MRC Tuberculosis Research Unit by Sir Geoffrey Marshall (1887–1982). The trial, carried out between 1946–1947, aimed to test the efficacy of the chemical streptomycin for curing pulmonary tuberculosis. The trial was both double-blind and placebo-controlled.[26]

text: The methodology of clinical trials was further developed by Sir Austin Bradford Hill, who had been involved in the streptomycin trials. From the 1920s, Hill applied statistics to medicine, attending the lectures of renowned mathematician Karl Pearson, amongst others. He became famous for a landmark study carried out in collaboration with Richard Doll on the correlation between smoking and lung cancer. They carried out a case-control study in 1950, which compared lung cancer patients with matched control and also began a sustained long-term prospective study into the broader issue of smoking and health, which involved studying the smoking habits and health of over 30,000 doctors over a period of several years. His certificate for election to the Royal Society called him "...the leader in the development in medicine of the precise experimental methods now used nationally and internationally in the evaluation of new therapeutic and prophylactic agents."

text: International clinical trials day is celebrated on 20 May.[27]

text: Types[edit]

text: One way of classifying clinical trials is by the way the researchers behave.

text:
In an observational study, the investigators observe the subjects and measure their outcomes. The researchers do not actively manage the study.
In an interventional study, the investigators give the research subjects a particular medicine or other intervention to compare the treated subjects with those receiving no treatment or the standard treatment. Then the researchers measure how the subjects' health changes.

text: Another way of classifying trials is by their purpose. The U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) organizes trials into five different types:[28]

text:
Prevention trials look for better ways to prevent disease in people who have never had the disease or to prevent a disease from returning. These approaches may include medicines, vitamins, vaccines, or lifestyle changes.
Screening trials test the best way to detect certain diseases or health conditions.
Diagnostic trials are conducted to find better tests or procedures for diagnosing a particular disease or condition.
Treatment trials test experimental treatments, new combinations of drugs, or new approaches to surgery or radiation therapy.
Quality of life trials (supportive care trials) explore ways to improve comfort and the quality of life for individuals with a chronic illness.
Compassionate use trials or expanded access trials provide partially tested, unapproved therapeutics to a small number of patients who have no other realistic options. Usually, this involves a disease for which no effective therapy has been approved, or a patient who has already failed all standard treatments and whose health is too compromised to qualify for participation in randomized clinical trials.[29] Usually, case-by-case approval must be granted by both the United States Food and Drug Administration and the pharmaceutical company for such exceptions.

text: A third classification is whether the trial design allows changes based on data accumulated during the trial.

text:
Fixed trials consider existing data only during the trial's design, do not modify the trial after it begins and do not assess the results until the study is complete.
Adaptive clinical trials use existing data to design the trial, and then use interim results to modify the trial as it proceeds. Modifications include dosage, sample size, drug undergoing trial, patient selection criteria and "cocktail" mix.[30] Adaptive trials often employ a Bayesian experimental design to assess the trial's progress. In some cases, trials have become an ongoing process that regularly adds and drops therapies and patient groups as more information is gained.[31] The aim is to more quickly identify drugs that have a therapeutic effect and to zero in on patient populations for whom the drug is appropriate.[32][33]

text: Finally, a common way of distinguishing trials is by phase, which in simple terms, relates to how close the drug is to being clinically proven both effective for its stated purpose and accepted by the regulatory authorities for use for that purpose.

text: Phases[edit]

text: Clinical trials involving new drugs are commonly classified into five phases. Each phase of the drug approval process is treated as a separate clinical trial. The drug-development process will normally proceed through all four phases over many years. If the drug successfully passes through phases 1, 2, and 3, it will usually be approved by the national regulatory authority for use in the general population. Before pharmaceutical companies start clinical trials on a drug, they will also have conducted extensive preclinical studies. Each phase has a different purpose and helps scientists answer a different question.

text:
Phase
Aim
Notes

Phase 0
Pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics in humans
Phase 0 trials are optional first-in-human trials. Single subtherapeutic doses of the study drug or treatment are given to a small number of subjects (10 to 15) to gather preliminary data on the agent's pharmacodynamics (what the drug does to the body) and pharmacokinetics (what the body does to the drugs).[34] For a test drug, the trial documents the absorption, distribution, metabolization, and removal (excretion) of the drug, and the drug's interactions within the body, to confirm that these appear to be as expected.

Phase 1
Screening for safety
Often the first-in-man trials. Testing within a small group of people (20–80) to evaluate safety, determine safe dosage ranges, and begin to identify side effects. A drug's side effects could be subtle or long term, or may only happen with a few people, so phase 1 trials are not expected to identify all side effects.

Phase 2
Establishing the efficacy of the drug, usually against a placebo
Testing with a larger group of people (100–300) to determine efficacy and to further evaluate its safety. The gradual increase in test group size allows for the evocation of less-common side effects.

Phase 3
Final confirmation of safety and efficacy
Testing with large groups of people (1,000–3,000) to confirm its efficacy, evaluate its effectiveness, monitor side effects, compare it to commonly used treatments, and collect information that will allow it to be used safely.

Phase 4
Safety studies during sales
Postmarketing studies delineate additional information, including the treatment's risks, benefits, and optimal use. As such, they are ongoing during the drug's lifetime of active medical use. (Particularly after approval under FDA Accelerated Approval Program)

tag: table

text: Trial design[edit]

text: A fundamental distinction in evidence-based practice is between observational studies and randomized controlled trials.[35] Types of observational studies in epidemiology, such as the cohort study and the case-control study, provide less compelling evidence than the randomized controlled trial.[35] In observational studies, the investigators retrospectively assess associations between the treatments given to participants and their health status, with potential for considerable errors in design and interpretation.[36]

text: A randomized controlled trial can provide compelling evidence that the study treatment causes an effect on human health.[35]

text: Currently, some phase 2 and most phase 3 drug trials are designed as randomized, double-blind, and placebo-controlled.

text:
Randomized: Each study subject is randomly assigned to receive either the study treatment or a placebo.
Blind: The subjects involved in the study do not know which study treatment they receive. If the study is double-blind, the researchers also do not know which treatment a subject receives. This intent is to prevent researchers from treating the two groups differently. A form of double-blind study called a "double-dummy" design allows additional insurance against bias. In this kind of study, all patients are given both placebo and active doses in alternating periods.
Placebo-controlled: The use of a placebo (fake treatment) allows the researchers to isolate the effect of the study treatment from the placebo effect.

text: Clinical studies having small numbers of subjects may be "sponsored" by single researchers or a small group of researchers, and are designed to test simple questions or feasibility to expand the research for a more comprehensive randomized controlled trial.[37]

text: Active control studies[edit]

text: In many cases, giving a placebo to a person suffering from a disease may be unethical.[38] To address this, it has become a common practice to conduct "active comparator" (also known as "active control") trials. In trials with an active control group, subjects are given either the experimental treatment or a previously approved treatment with known effectiveness.

text: Master protocol[edit]

text: In such studies, multiple experimental treatments are tested in a single trial. Genetic testing enables researchers to group patients according to their genetic profile, deliver drugs based on that profile to that group and compare the results. Multiple companies can participate, each bringing a different drug. The first such approach targets squamous cell cancer, which includes varying genetic disruptions from patient to patient. Amgen, AstraZeneca and Pfizer are involved, the first time they have worked together in a late-stage trial. Patients whose genomic profiles do not match any of the trial drugs receive a drug designed to stimulate the immune system to attack cancer.[39]

text: Clinical trial protocol[edit]

text: A clinical trial protocol is a document used to define and manage the trial. It is prepared by a panel of experts. All study investigators are expected to strictly observe the protocol.

text: The protocol describes the scientific rationale, objective(s), design, methodology, statistical considerations and organization of the planned trial. Details of the trial are provided in documents referenced in the protocol, such as an investigator's brochure.

text: The protocol contains a precise study plan to assure safety and health of the trial subjects and to provide an exact template for trial conduct by investigators. This allows data to be combined across all investigators/sites. The protocol also informs the study administrators (often a contract research organization).

text: The format and content of clinical trial protocols sponsored by pharmaceutical, biotechnology or medical device companies in the United States, European Union, or Japan have been standardized to follow Good Clinical Practice guidance[40] issued by the International Conference on Harmonization of Technical Requirements for Registration of Pharmaceuticals for Human Use (ICH).[41] Regulatory authorities in Canada and Australia also follow ICH guidelines. Journals such as Trials, encourage investigators to publish their protocols.

text: Design features[edit]

text: Informed consent[edit]

text: Clinical trials recruit study subjects to sign a document representing their "informed consent".[42] The document includes details such as its purpose, duration, required procedures, risks, potential benefits, key contacts and institutional requirements.[43] The participant then decides whether to sign the document. The document is not a contract, as the participant can withdraw at any time without penalty.

text: Informed consent is a legal process in which a recruit is instructed about key facts before deciding whether to participate. Researchers explain the details of the study in terms the subject can understand. The information is presented in the subject's native language. Generally, children cannot autonomously provide informed consent, but depending on their age and other factors, may be required to provide informed assent.

text: Statistical power[edit]

text: This section does not cite any sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (November 2014) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

text: The number of subjects has a large impact on the ability to reliably detect and measure effects of the intervention. This is described as its "power". The larger the number of participants, the greater the statistical power and the greater the cost.

text: The statistical power estimates the ability of a trial to detect a difference of a particular size (or larger) between the treatment and control groups. For example, a trial of a lipid-lowering drug versus placebo with 100 patients in each group might have a power of 0.90 to detect a difference between placebo and trial groups receiving dosage of 10 mg/dL or more, but only 0.70 to detect a difference of 6 mg/dL.

text: Placebo groups[edit]

text: Merely giving a treatment can have nonspecific effects. These are controlled for by the inclusion of patients who receive only a placebo. Subjects are assigned randomly without informing them to which group they belonged. Many trials are doubled-blinded so that researchers do not know to which group a subject is assigned.

text: Assigning a subject to a placebo group can pose an ethical problem if it violates his or her right to receive the best available treatment. The Declaration of Helsinki provides guidelines on this issue.

text: Duration[edit]

text: Clinical trials are only a small part of the research that goes into developing a new treatment. Potential drugs, for example, first have to be discovered, purified, characterized, and tested in labs (in cell and animal studies) before ever undergoing clinical trials. In all, about 1,000 potential drugs are tested before just one reaches the point of being tested in a clinical trial.[citation needed] For example, a new cancer drug has, on average, six years of research behind it before it even makes it to clinical trials. But the major holdup in making new cancer drugs available is the time it takes to complete clinical trials themselves. On average, about eight years pass from the time a cancer drug enters clinical trials until it receives approval from regulatory agencies for sale to the public.[44] Drugs for other diseases have similar timelines.

text: Some reasons a clinical trial might last several years:

text:
For chronic conditions such as cancer, it takes months, if not years, to see if a cancer treatment has an effect on a patient.
For drugs that are not expected to have a strong effect (meaning a large number of patients must be recruited to observe 'any' effect), recruiting enough patients to test the drug's effectiveness (i.e., getting statistical power) can take several years.
Only certain people who have the target disease condition are eligible to take part in each clinical trial. Researchers who treat these particular patients must participate in the trial. Then they must identify the desirable patients and obtain consent from them or their families to take part in the trial.

text: The biggest barrier to completing studies is the shortage of people who take part. All drug and many device trials target a subset of the population, meaning not everyone can participate. Some drug trials require patients to have unusual combinations of disease characteristics. It is a challenge to find the appropriate patients and obtain their consent, especially when they may receive no direct benefit (because they are not paid, the study drug is not yet proven to work, or the patient may receive a placebo). In the case of cancer patients, fewer than 5% of adults with cancer will participate in drug trials. According to the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), about 400 cancer medicines were being tested in clinical trials in 2005. Not all of these will prove to be useful, but those that are may be delayed in getting approved because the number of participants is so low.[45]

text: For clinical trials involving potential for seasonal influences (such as airborne allergies, seasonal affective disorder, influenza, and skin diseases), the study may be done during a limited part of the year (such as spring for pollen allergies), when the drug can be tested.[46][47]

text: Clinical trials that do not involve a new drug usually have a much shorter duration. (Exceptions are epidemiological studies, such as the Nurses' Health Study).

text: Administration[edit]

text: Clinical trials designed by a local investigator, and (in the US) federally funded clinical trials, are almost always administered by the researcher who designed the study and applied for the grant. Small-scale device studies may be administered by the sponsoring company. Clinical trials of new drugs are usually administered by a contract research organization (CRO) hired by the sponsoring company. The sponsor provides the drug and medical oversight. A CRO is contracted to perform all the administrative work on a clinical trial. For phases 2, 3 and 4, the CRO recruits participating researchers, trains them, provides them with supplies, coordinates study administration and data collection, sets up meetings, monitors the sites for compliance with the clinical protocol, and ensures the sponsor receives data from every site. Specialist site management organizations can also be hired to coordinate with the CRO to ensure rapid IRB/IEC approval and faster site initiation and patient recruitment. Phase 1 clinical trials of new medicines are often conducted in a specialist clinical trial clinic, with dedicated pharmacologists, where the subjects can be observed by full-time staff. These clinics are often run by a CRO which specialises in these studies.

text: At a participating site, one or more research assistants (often nurses) do most of the work in conducting the clinical trial. The research assistant's job can include some or all of the following: providing the local institutional review board (IRB) with the documentation necessary to obtain its permission to conduct the study, assisting with study start-up, identifying eligible patients, obtaining consent from them or their families, administering study treatment(s), collecting and statistically analyzing data, maintaining and updating data files during followup, and communicating with the IRB, as well as the sponsor and CRO.

text: Marketing[edit]

text: Janet Yang uses the Interactional Justice Model to test the effects of willingness to talk with a doctor and clinical trial enrollment.[48] Results found that potential clinical trial candidates were less likely to enroll in clinical trials if the patient is more willing to talk with their doctor. The reasoning behind this discovery may be patients are happy with their current care. Another reason for the negative relationship between perceived fairness and clinical trial enrollment is the lack of independence from the care provider. Results found that there is a positive relationship between a lack of willingness to talk with their doctor and clinical trial enrollment. Lack of willingness to talk about clinical trials with current care providers may be due to patients’ independence from the doctor. Patients who are less likely to talk about clinical trials are more willing to use other sources of information to gain a better insight of alternative treatments. Clinical trial enrollment should be motivated to utilize websites and television advertising to inform the public about clinical trial enrollment.

text: Information technology[edit]

text: The last decade has seen a proliferation of information technology use in the planning and conduct of clinical trials. Clinical trial management systems are often used by research sponsors or CROs to help plan and manage the operational aspects of a clinical trial, particularly with respect to investigational sites. Advanced analytics for identifying researchers and research sites with expertise in a given area utilize public and private information about ongoing research.[49] Web-based electronic data capture (EDC) and clinical data management systems are used in a majority of clinical trials[50] to collect case report data from sites, manage its quality and prepare it for analysis. Interactive voice response systems are used by sites to register the enrollment of patients using a phone and to allocate patients to a particular treatment arm (although phones are being increasingly replaced with web-based (IWRS) tools which are sometimes part of the EDC system). While patient-reported outcome were often paper based in the past, measurements are increasingly being collected using web portals or hand-held ePRO (or eDiary) devices, sometimes wireless.[51] Statistical software is used to analyze the collected data and prepare them for regulatory submission. Access to many of these applications are increasingly aggregated in web-based clinical trial portals. In 2011, the FDA approved a phase 1 trial that used telemonitoring, also known as remote patient monitoring, to collect biometric data in patients' homes and transmit it electronically to the trial database. This technology provides many more data points and is far more convenient for patients, because they have fewer visits to trial sites.

text: Ethical aspects[edit]

text: Clinical trials are closely supervised by appropriate regulatory authorities. All studies involving a medical or therapeutic intervention on patients must be approved by a supervising ethics committee before permission is granted to run the trial. The local ethics committee has discretion on how it will supervise noninterventional studies (observational studies or those using already collected data). In the US, this body is called the Institutional Review Board (IRB); in the EU, they are called Ethics committees. Most IRBs are located at the local investigator's hospital or institution, but some sponsors allow the use of a central (independent/for profit) IRB for investigators who work at smaller institutions.

text: To be ethical, researchers must obtain the full and informed consent of participating human subjects. (One of the IRB's main functions is to ensure potential patients are adequately informed about the clinical trial.) If the patient is unable to consent for him/herself, researchers can seek consent from the patient's legally authorized representative. In California, the state has prioritized the individuals who can serve as the legally authorized representative.[52]

text: In some US locations, the local IRB must certify researchers and their staff before they can conduct clinical trials. They must understand the federal patient privacy (HIPAA) law and good clinical practice. The International Conference of Harmonisation Guidelines for Good Clinical Practice is a set of standards used internationally for the conduct of clinical trials. The guidelines aim to ensure the "rights, safety and well being of trial subjects are protected".

text: The notion of informed consent of participating human subjects exists in many countries all over the world, but its precise definition may still vary.

text: Informed consent is clearly a 'necessary' condition for ethical conduct but does not 'ensure' ethical conduct. In compassionate use trials the latter becomes a particularly difficult problem. The final objective is to serve the community of patients or future patients in a best-possible and most responsible way. See also Expanded access. However, it may be hard to turn this objective into a well-defined, quantified, objective function. In some cases this can be done, however, for instance, for questions of when to stop sequential treatments (see Odds algorithm), and then quantified methods may play an important role.

text: Additional ethical concerns are present when conducting clinical trials on children (pediatrics), and in emergency or epidemic situations.[53][54]

text: Conflicts of interest and unfavorable studies[edit]

text: In response to specific cases in which unfavorable data from pharmaceutical company-sponsored research were not published, the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America published new guidelines urging companies to report all findings and limit the financial involvement in drug companies by researchers.[55] The US Congress signed into law a bill which requires phase II and phase III clinical trials to be registered by the sponsor on the clinical trials website compiled by the National Institutes of Health.[56]

text: Drug researchers not directly employed by pharmaceutical companies often seek grants from manufacturers, and manufacturers often look to academic researchers to conduct studies within networks of universities and their hospitals, e.g., for translational cancer research. Similarly, competition for tenured academic positions, government grants and prestige create conflicts of interest among academic scientists.[57] According to one study, approximately 75% of articles retracted for misconduct-related reasons have no declared industry financial support.[58] Seeding trials are particularly controversial.[59]

text: In the United States, all clinical trials submitted to the FDA as part of a drug approval process are independently assessed by clinical experts within the Food and Drug Administration,[60] including inspections of primary data collection at selected clinical trial sites.[61]

text: In 2001, the editors of 12 major journals issued a joint editorial, published in each journal, on the control over clinical trials exerted by sponsors, particularly targeting the use of contracts which allow sponsors to review the studies prior to publication and withhold publication. They strengthened editorial restrictions to counter the effect. The editorial noted that contract research organizations had, by 2000, received 60% of the grants from pharmaceutical companies in the US. Researchers may be restricted from contributing to the trial design, accessing the raw data, and interpreting the results.[62]

text: Safety[edit]

text: Responsibility for the safety of the subjects in a clinical trial is shared between the sponsor, the local site investigators (if different from the sponsor), the various IRBs that supervise the study, and (in some cases, if the study involves a marketable drug or device), the regulatory agency for the country where the drug or device will be sold.

text: For safety reasons, many clinical trials of drugs are designed to exclude women of childbearing age, pregnant women, or women who become pregnant during the study. In some cases, the male partners of these women are also excluded or required to take birth control measures.

text: Sponsor[edit]

text: Throughout the clinical trial, the sponsor is responsible for accurately informing the local site investigators of the true historical safety record of the drug, device or other medical treatments to be tested, and of any potential interactions of the study treatment(s) with already approved treatments. This allows the local investigators to make an informed judgment on whether to participate in the study or not. The sponsor is also responsible for monitoring the results of the study as they come in from the various sites as the trial proceeds. In larger clinical trials, a sponsor will use the services of a data monitoring committee (DMC, known in the US as a data safety monitoring board). This independent group of clinicians and statisticians meets periodically to review the unblinded data the sponsor has received so far. The DMC has the power to recommend termination of the study based on their review, for example if the study treatment is causing more deaths than the standard treatment, or seems to be causing unexpected and study-related serious adverse events. The sponsor is responsible for collecting adverse event reports from all site investigators in the study, and for informing all the investigators of the sponsor's judgment as to whether these adverse events were related or not related to the study treatment.

text: The sponsor and the local site investigators are jointly responsible for writing a site-specific informed consent that accurately informs the potential subjects of the true risks and potential benefits of participating in the study, while at the same time presenting the material as briefly as possible and in ordinary language. FDA regulations state that participating in clinical trials is voluntary, with the subject having the right not to participate or to end participation at any time.[63]

text: Local site investigators[edit]

text: The ethical principle of primum non nocere ("first, do no harm") guides the trial, and if an investigator believes the study treatment may be harming subjects in the study, the investigator can stop participating at any time. On the other hand, investigators often have a financial interest in recruiting subjects, and could act unethically to obtain and maintain their participation.

text: The local investigators are responsible for conducting the study according to the study protocol, and supervising the study staff throughout the duration of the study. The local investigator or his/her study staff are also responsible for ensuring the potential subjects in the study understand the risks and potential benefits of participating in the study. In other words, they (or their legally authorized representatives) must give truly informed consent.

text: Local investigators are responsible for reviewing all adverse event reports sent by the sponsor. These adverse event reports contain the opinion of both the investigator at the site where the adverse event occurred, and the sponsor, regarding the relationship of the adverse event to the study treatments. Local investigators also are responsible for making an independent judgment of these reports, and promptly informing the local IRB of all serious and study treatment-related adverse events.

text: When a local investigator is the sponsor, there may not be formal adverse event reports, but study staff at all locations are responsible for informing the coordinating investigator of anything unexpected. The local investigator is responsible for being truthful to the local IRB in all communications relating to the study.

text: Institutional review boards (IRBs)[edit]

text: Approval by an Institutional Review Board (IRB), or ethics board, is necessary before all but the most informal research can begin. In commercial clinical trials, the study protocol is not approved by an IRB before the sponsor recruits sites to conduct the trial. However, the study protocol and procedures have been tailored to fit generic IRB submission requirements. In this case, and where there is no independent sponsor, each local site investigator submits the study protocol, the consent(s), the data collection forms, and supporting documentation to the local IRB. Universities and most hospitals have in-house IRBs. Other researchers (such as in walk-in clinics) use independent IRBs.

text: The IRB scrutinizes the study for both medical safety and protection of the patients involved in the study, before it allows the researcher to begin the study. It may require changes in study procedures or in the explanations given to the patient. A required yearly "continuing review" report from the investigator updates the IRB on the progress of the study and any new safety information related to the study.

text: Regulatory agencies[edit]

text: In the US, the FDA can audit the files of local site investigators after they have finished participating in a study, to see if they were correctly following study procedures. This audit may be random, or for cause (because the investigator is suspected of fraudulent data). Avoiding an audit is an incentive for investigators to follow study procedures.

text: Alternatively, many American pharmaceutical companies have moved some clinical trials overseas. Benefits of conducting trials abroad include lower costs (in some countries) and the ability to run larger trials in shorter timeframes, whereas a potential disadvantage exists in lower-quality trial management.[64] Different countries have different regulatory requirements and enforcement abilities. An estimated 40% of all clinical trials now take place in Asia, Eastern Europe, and Central and South America. "There is no compulsory registration system for clinical trials in these countries and many do not follow European directives in their operations", says Jacob Sijtsma of the Netherlands-based WEMOS, an advocacy health organisation tracking clinical trials in developing countries.[65]

text: Beginning in the 1980s, harmonization of clinical trial protocols was shown as feasible across countries of the European Union. At the same time, coordination between Europe, Japan and the United States led to a joint regulatory-industry initiative on international harmonization named after 1990 as the International Conference on Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Registration of Pharmaceuticals for Human Use (ICH)[66] Currently, most clinical trial programs follow ICH guidelines, aimed at "ensuring that good quality, safe and effective medicines are developed and registered in the most efficient and cost-effective manner. These activities are pursued in the interest of the consumer and public health, to prevent unnecessary duplication of clinical trials in humans and to minimize the use of animal testing without compromising the regulatory obligations of safety and effectiveness."[67]

text: Aggregation of safety data during clinical development[edit]

text: Aggregating safety data across clinical trials during drug development is important because trials are generally designed to focus on determining how well the drug works. The safety data collected and aggregated across multiple trials as the drug is developed allows the sponsor, investigators and regulatory agencies to monitor the aggregate safety profile of experimental medicines as they're developed. The value of assessing aggregate safety data is: a) decisions based on aggregate safety assessment during development of the medicine can be made throughout the medicine's development and b) it sets up the sponsor and regulators well for assessing the medicine's safety after the drug is approved.[68][69][70][71][72]

text: Economics[edit]

text: Clinical trial costs vary depending on trial phase, type of trial, and disease studied. A study of clinical trials conducted in the United States from 2004 to 2012 found the average cost of phase I trials to be $1.4 million and $6.6 million, depending on the type of disease. Phase II trials ranged from $7 million to $20 million, and phase III trials from $11 million to $53 million.[73]

text: Sponsor[edit]

text: The cost of a study depends on many factors, especially the number of sites conducting the study, the number of patients involved, and whether the study treatment is already approved for medical use.

text: The expenses incurred by a pharmaceutical company in administering a phase 3 or 4 clinical trial may include, among others:

text:
production of the drug(s) or device(s) being evaluated
staff salaries for the designers and administrators of the trial
payments to the contract research organization, the site management organization (if used) and any outside consultants
payments to local researchers and their staff for their time and effort in recruiting test subjects and collecting data for the sponsor
the cost of study materials and the charges incurred to ship them
communication with the local researchers, including on-site monitoring by the CRO before and (in some cases) multiple times during the study
one or more investigator training meetings
expense incurred by the local researchers, such as pharmacy fees, IRB fees and postage
any payments to subjects enrolled in the trial
the expense of treating a test subject who develops a medical condition caused by the study drug

text: These expenses are incurred over several years.

text: In the USA, sponsors may receive a 50 percent tax credit for clinical trials conducted on drugs being developed for the treatment of orphan diseases.[74] National health agencies, such as the US National Institutes of Health, offer grants to investigators who design clinical trials that attempt to answer research questions of interest to the agency. In these cases, the investigator who writes the grant and administers the study acts as the sponsor, and coordinates data collection from any other sites. These other sites may or may not be paid for participating in the study, depending on the amount of the grant and the amount of effort expected from them. Using internet resources can, in some cases, reduce the economic burden.[75]

text: Investigators[edit]

text: Investigators are often compensated for their work in clinical trials. These amounts can be small, just covering a partial salary for research assistants and the cost of any supplies (usually the case with national health agency studies), or be substantial and include 'overhead' that allows the investigator to pay the research staff during times between clinical trials.[citation needed]

text: Subjects[edit]

text: Participants in phase 1 drug trials do not gain any direct health benefit from taking part. They are generally paid a fee for their time, with payments regulated and not related to any risk involved. In later phase trials, subjects may not be paid to ensure their motivation for participating with potential for a health benefit or contributing to medical knowledge. Small payments may be made for study-related expenses such as travel or as compensation for their time in providing follow-up information about their health after the trial treatment ends.

text: Participant recruitment and participation[edit]

text: Phase 0 and phase 1 drug trials seek healthy volunteers. Most other clinical trials seek patients who have a specific disease or medical condition. The diversity observed in society should be reflected in clinical trials through the appropriate inclusion of ethnic minority populations.[76] Patient recruitment or participant recruitment plays a significant role in the activities and responsibilities of sites conducting clinical trials.[77]

text: All volunteers being considered for a trial are required to undertake a medical screening. Requirements differ according to the trial needs, but typically volunteers would be screened in a medical laboratory for:[78]

text:
Measurement of the electrical activity of the heart (ECG)
Measurement of blood pressure, heart rate and body temperature
Blood sampling
Urine sampling
Weight and height measurement
Drug abuse testing
Pregnancy testing

text: Locating trials[edit]

text: Depending on the kind of participants required, sponsors of clinical trials, or contract research organizations working on their behalf, try to find sites with qualified personnel as well as access to patients who could participate in the trial. Working with those sites, they may use various recruitment strategies, including patient databases, newspaper and radio advertisements, flyers, posters in places the patients might go (such as doctor's offices), and personal recruitment of patients by investigators.

text: Volunteers with specific conditions or diseases have additional online resources to help them locate clinical trials. For example, the Fox Trial Finder connects Parkinson's disease trials around the world to volunteers who have a specific set of criteria such as location, age, and symptoms.[79] Other disease-specific services exist for volunteers to find trials related to their condition.[80] Volunteers may search directly on ClinicalTrials.gov to locate trials using a registry run by the U.S. National Institutes of Health and National Library of Medicine.

text: Research[edit]

text: In 2012, Z. Janet Yang, Katherine A. McComas, Geri K. Gay, John P. Leonard, Andrew J. Dannenberg, and Hildy Dillon conducted research on the attitudes towards clinical trial treatment and the decision making of signing up for such trials by cancer patients and the general population. They used the risk information seeking and processing (RISP) model to analyze the social implications that affect attitudes and decision making pertaining to clinical trials. People who hold a higher stake or interest in clinical trial treatment showed a greater likelihood of seeking information about clinical trials. Those with networks that stress the importance of learning about clinical trials are also more likely to seek and process information more deeply. People with more knowledge about clinical trials tend to have to a greater likelihood of signing up. In the study, cancer patients reported more optimistic attitudes towards clinical trials than the general population. Having a more optimistic outlook on clinical trials also leads to greater likelihood of enrolling.[81]


document_title: NASCAR Rookie of the Year

question_text: who won rookie of the year in nascar 2017

text: NASCAR Rookie of the Year

text: History of the Award[edit]

text: The Rookie of the Year award for NASCAR's premier series was first presented to a driver named Blackie Pitt by Houston Lawing, NASCAR'S Public Relations director, in 1954. While it wasn't an official award, it would help set the standard for the top rookie prize. An official award started with the 1958 season.

text: From the 1958 through the 1973 seasons, NASCAR did not have an official points system to determine the Rookie of the Year, so NASCAR's officials merely gathered together to select a winner. Some years were straight forward, such as James Hylton's selection in 1966, when he finished second in the overall championship, the highest ever finish for an eligible rookie.[1] In other years, the system came under controversy, as officials didn't consider former champions from rival racing series and there were no transparent and consistent criteria for selecting the winner. Since 1974, the Rookie of the Year points system described below has been used, even if it meant the winner was not the highest finisher in championship points.

text: The award is currently sponsored by Sunoco. Drivers competing for the award must display the Sunoco contingency decal.

text: Rookie Points System[edit]

text: Main Rookie Race-by-Race Points[edit]

text: Rookie of the year candidates earn points in each race they enter. At season's end, they count the points earned in their best seventeen (Monster Energy NASCAR Cup Series), sixteen (Xfinity Series), or fourteen (Camping World Truck Series) races of the season.

text:
One point is granted to all rookies who enter an event prior to the entry deadline, regardless of finishing position or even if they don't qualify. All rookies with teams that enter past the regular entry deadline ("post entry") do not receive this point.
Race performance points are also awarded, on a declining ten-to-one system. The highest finishing rookie earns ten points, the second highest finishing rookie earns nine points, etc.
Coupled with the "Race-by-Race Bonus" (see next item), a rookie candidate can earn up to 21 points for his/her performance in every individual race.[2]

tag: ol

text: Rookie Bonus Points[edit]

text: Bonus points are also awarded to drivers in the following circumstances:

text:
"Race-by-Race Bonus". If a candidate wins a race, he/she earns ten bonus rookie points for that race. If a candidate finishes second, he/she earns nine bonus rookie points for that race, etc.
"Segment Bonus – Cup and Xfinity". The season is divided into three segments, the first segment being after the first ten races of the season, the second segment being after the second ten races of the season, and the third segment being the rest of the schedule. The candidate with the most championship points in each segment earns ten bonus rookie points, the candidate with the second-most championship points earns nine, etc.
"Season Bonus – Cup and Xfinity". The single rookie driver who finishes highest in the overall championship standings at season's end will receive an additional ten bonus rookie points.
"Season Bonus – Truck". Because the season is only 22 races, the segment system is not applied to this series. For Truck rookies, the candidate with the most championship points at the end of the overall season earns ten bonus rookie points, the candidate with the second-most championship points earns nine, etc.[2]

text: Panel Points[edit]

text: There is a five-member panel composed of the preceding year's Series Champion, officials, etc. that meet during the final week of the season. They evaluate that year's candidates, on a declining ten point system, on each of the following criteria:

text:
Conduct with officials
Conduct and awareness on the racetrack
Personal appearance and conduct with the media

text: The scores of all panel members for each candidate are averaged, and the candidate with the most panel points at the end of the overall season earns ten bonus rookie points, the candidate with the second-most panel points earns nine, etc.[2]

text: Note that anyone involved with a rookie candidate (such as a teammate or car owner) may not serve on that year's panel and will be replaced by another person in that category. In case of an ineligible Series Champion, it is the next preceding year's Series Champion. In 2002, 2000 champion Bobby Labonte served on the Cup rookie panel as NASCAR disqualified 2001 champion Jeff Gordon from the position because of his equity ownership in candidate Jimmie Johnson's No. 48 car.

text: Eligibility[edit]

text: Drivers must meet the following criteria in order to be eligible to run for or receive the Rookie of the Year award.

text:
Must have run no more than five (prior to 2001), seven (2001–10), or ten (in the Truck Series 2013–) and have been declared to race for driver points in that series (2011–present), races in any previous season.[3]
Drivers who compete in more than five races in a higher NASCAR-sanctioned series are not eligible for the award in a lower series if they have not declared for the higher series.
If a driver does not start eight races before the end of Race 20 on the schedule, they will immediately become ineligible to earn rookie points for the rest of that season and starting in 2011, remained declared for that series. Drivers may change series declaration in order to avoid this.
A driver may not receive rookie points if they start a race for a team that they did not qualify with. However, they are still eligible for championship points in that race.

text: There have been a few cases before the 2011 rule change where aspiring Cup drivers have sacrificed their future eligibility to be Rookie of the Year candidates by driving part-time schedules including more than seven Cup races. For example, in 2009, Brad Keselowski ended up running 15 races, including a win at Talladega. Two other famous drivers who did the same thing are Carl Edwards (13 Cup races in 2004), and Marcos Ambrose (11 races in 2008).

text: On the other hand, 2007 Rookie of the Year winner Juan Pablo Montoya was eligible even though he had previously been the 1999 Rookie of the Year in the CART series (which at the time was the top level of open wheel racing.)

text: The 2009 NASCAR Camping World Truck Series Rookie of the Year was Johnny Sauter, who was a veteran of both the Nationwide and Cup Series. He had never run more than three Truck races in any previous season, and made no 2009 starts at all in either of the two higher-level series, hence he was eligible for the truck series' rookie award. The 2006 Busch Series ROTY runner-up John Andretti was a veteran of the Cup Series but had made only one prior Busch Series start, making him eligible for the award.

text: In 1992, Ricky Craven, the Busch Series Rookie of the Year, actually had run seven races when the limit was five in 1991. However, Craven was only credited with two Busch-only starts, as the other five starts were in combination races with the Busch North Series (now the K&N Pro Series East), which he was a full-time regular at the time. The races were registered in the Busch North Series, so he could enter the race in that series and not compromise his eligibility in the "South" series.

text: Beginning in 2011, drivers that are ineligible for points in one series cannot earn Rookie points in that series. For example, Trevor Bayne ran 18 races in 2011; however, due to him declaring to run for the Nationwide championship, Bayne was also ineligible to declare for ROTY in 2011. Bayne therefore retained the right to declare for Rookie eligibility at a later date. However, when Bayne finally declared for Sprint Cup points in 2015, a previously little-known provision came into play that places a limit on the cumulative number of races a driver can run without declaring for points before he loses future Rookie eligibility. Bayne was confirmed by NASCAR to have exceeded this limit (although there has yet to be a definite announcement on what this limit actually is) and is therefore ineligible to run for Rookie of the Year in 2015. Danica Patrick ran 10 races in 2012 in Sprint Cup, though she declared she would race for the Nationwide championship, allowing her in 2013 to declare in Sprint Cup, and race as a rookie. This also allows lower-tier drivers to substitute for injured drivers in higher-tier series without risk of losing rookie eligibility.

text: Furthermore, in 2013, NASCAR added rules where drivers 16 and 17 years of age may race in the Camping World Truck Series and not lose rookie eligibility because a driver can only race 10 of the 23 races on the schedule (tracks under 1.25 miles (2.01 km) or shorter and road courses). In 2015, two rookie contenders in the series – Erik Jones and John Hunter Nemechek – were declared rookies though they had exceeded the seven-race limit because of age restrictions (Jones turned 18 in the middle of the 2014 season, and Nemechek turned 18 in the middle of the 2015 season). Cole Custer was declared a 2016 Truck Series rookie despite having raced two seasons because of age eligibility (turned 18 before the start of the 2016 season).

text: Monster Energy NASCAR Cup Series[edit]

text: Announced 2018 ROTY contenders[edit]

text:
Ray Black Jr.[4]
William Byron[5]
Darrell Wallace Jr.[6]

text: History[edit]

text: Below is a list of all winners, and known runners-up. (Note: some of the drivers listed here are not confirmed as ROTY contenders, and competed in more than the maximum number of races to be eligible for ROTY honors.)

text: ROTY who later became the Series Champion

text:
¶
Did not declare for ROTY and ran more than seven races (or 10 in the Truck Series 2013–), but did not run for series points (2011–) and thus could be eligible in a later year.

†
Did not declare for ROTY, but ran more than five (or seven as of 2001, or ten in the Truck Series 2013–) races (while eligible for series points, 2011–) or did not run for series points but ran too many races in that series (limit is unknown as of yet) and are completely ineligible for the award.

*
Declared for ROTY, but did not make minimum five (or seven as of 2001) races, thus could be eligible in a later year.

±
Prince and Orr died during their rookie seasons and were unable to complete the schedule.

Ø
Moroso died after race 25 of 29 during his rookie season, receiving the award posthumously.

♦
Hylton finished second in the overall 1966 championship, the highest ever finish for an eligible rookie.[1]

æ
Pitt did not receive an official award.

text:
Year
Winner
Runner(s) Up

2017
Erik Jones
Daniel Suárez, Ty Dillon, Corey LaJoie†, Gray Gaulding

2016
Chase Elliott
Chris Buescher, Ryan Blaney, Brian Scott, Jeffrey Earnhardt, Ty Dillon¶

2015
Brett Moffitt
Matt DiBenedetto, Jeb Burton, Alex Kennedy, Tanner Berryhill*, Ryan Blaney¶, Brian Scott¶

2014
Kyle Larson
Austin Dillon, Justin Allgaier, Cole Whitt, Michael Annett, Alex Bowman, Ryan Truex, Parker Kligerman, Trevor Bayne†

2013
Ricky Stenhouse Jr.[7]
Danica Patrick, Timmy Hill, Trevor Bayne¶, Austin Dillon¶

2012
Stephen Leicht
Josh Wise, Timmy Hill*, Trevor Bayne¶, Danica Patrick¶

2011
Andy Lally
T. J. Bell*, Brian Keselowski*, Trevor Bayne¶

2010
Kevin Conway
Terry Cook*, Landon Cassill†

2009
Joey Logano
Scott Speed, Max Papis, Dexter Bean*, Brad Keselowski†

2008
Regan Smith
Sam Hornish Jr., Patrick Carpentier, Michael McDowell, Dario Franchitti, Jacques Villeneuve*, Aric Almirola†, Marcos Ambrose†

2007
Juan Pablo Montoya
David Ragan, Paul Menard, David Reutimann, A. J. Allmendinger, Brandon Whitt*

2006
Denny Hamlin
Clint Bowyer, Martin Truex Jr., Reed Sorenson, J. J. Yeley, David Stremme, Brent Sherman*, David Gilliland†, Chad Chaffin†

2005
Kyle Busch
Travis Kvapil, Mike Garvey, Stanton Barrett, Eric McClure*, Boris Said†, Carl Long†

2004
Kasey Kahne
Brendan Gaughan, Brian Vickers, Scott Wimmer, Scott Riggs, Johnny Sauter, Kirk Shelmerdine†, Carl Edwards†

2003
Jamie McMurray
Greg Biffle, Tony Raines, Casey Mears, Jack Sprague, Larry Foyt, Hideo Fukuyama*, Christian Fittipaldi†

2002
Ryan Newman
Jimmie Johnson, Shawna Robinson*, Carl Long*, Hermie Sadler†

2001
Kevin Harvick
Kurt Busch, Casey Atwood, Jason Leffler, Ron Hornaday, Jr., Andy Houston, Bobby Hamilton Jr.†

2000
Matt Kenseth
Dale Earnhardt Jr., Dave Blaney, Scott Pruett, Stacy Compton, Mike Bliss, Ed Berrier, Jeff Fuller*

1999
Tony Stewart
Elliott Sadler, Buckshot Jones, Stanton Barrett*, Dan Pardus*, Mike Harmon*

1998
Kenny Irwin Jr.
Kevin Lepage, Jerry Nadeau, Steve Park, Dennis Setzer†

1997
Mike Skinner
David Green, Jeff Green, Robby Gordon, Lance Hooper†

1996
Johnny Benson Jr.
Randy MacDonald*, Stacy Compton*, Gary Bradberry†

1995
Ricky Craven
Robert Pressley, Randy LaJoie, Davy Jones, Steve Kinser*, Mike Chase*, Gary Bradberry*, Terry Byers*, Elton Sawyer†

1994
Jeff Burton
Steve Grissom, Joe Nemechek, John Andretti, Mike Wallace, Ward Burton, Jeremy Mayfield, Loy Allen Jr., Billy Standridge, Curtis Markham*, Rick Carelli*, T. W. Taylor*, Rodney Orr±, Rich Bickle†

1993
Jeff Gordon
Bobby Labonte, Kenny Wallace, P. J. Jones, Todd Bodine†

1992
Jimmy Hensley
Andy Belmont, Dave Mader III*, Bob Schacht†

1991
Bobby Hamilton
Ted Musgrave, Stanley Smith, Wally Dallenbach Jr., Jeff Purvis, Sammy Swindell*, Rich Bickle*, Dave Mader III*, Dorsey Schroeder*

1990
Rob Moroso Ø
Jack Pennington, Jerry O'Neil, Jeff Purvis*

1989
Dick Trickle
Hut Stricklin, Larry Pearson, Jimmy Spencer, Rick Mast, Ben Hess, Chad Little, Butch Miller, Mickey Gibbs

1988
Ken Bouchard
Ernie Irvan, Brad Noffsinger, Jimmy Horton

1987
Davey Allison
Dale Jarrett, Steve Christman, Rodney Combs, Derrike Cope, Jerry Cranmer*, Mark Stahl†, Brett Bodine†

1986
Alan Kulwicki
Michael Waltrip, Chet Fillip, Davey Allison*, Jerry Cranmer*, Rick Baldwin*, Jonathan Lee Edwards*, Wayne Kramer*, Pancho Carter†, Jim Sauter†

1985
Ken Schrader
Eddie Bierschwale, Don Hume

1984
Rusty Wallace
Greg Sacks, Phil Parsons, Clark Dwyer, Tommy Ellis†, Doug Heveron†, Dean Combs†

1983
Sterling Marlin
Trevor Boys, Ronnie Hopkins, Ken Ragan, Bobby Hillin Jr.

1982
Geoff Bodine
Mark Martin, Brad Teague

1981
Ron Bouchard
Morgan Shepherd, Tim Richmond, Mike Alexander, Elliott Forbes-Robinson, Joe Ruttman, Stan Barrett, Connie Saylor, Gary Balough, Rick Wilson†, Johnny Rutherford†

1980
Jody Ridley
Lake Speed, Kyle Petty, Slick Johnson

1979
Dale Earnhardt
Joe Millikan, Terry Labonte, Harry Gant

1978
Ronnie Thomas
Roger Hamby, Blackie Wangerin, Baxter Price, Al Holbert

1977
Ricky Rudd
Sam Sommers, Janet Guthrie, Tighe Scott, Tommy Gale, Gary Myers

1976
Skip Manning
Terry Bivens, Neil Bonnett, Jimmy Means, Bill Elliott, John A. Utsman, Johnny Ray

1975
Bruce Hill
Carl Adams, Bruce Jacobi, Grant Adcox, Chuck Bown, Joe Mihalic, Travis Tiller, Ferrel Harris, Dick May

1974
Earl Ross
Richie Panch, Jackie Rogers, Ramo Stott

1973
Lennie Pond
Darrell Waltrip, Johnny Barnes

1972
Larry Smith
David Sisco, Doc Faustina

1971
Walter Ballard
Maynard Troyer, Richard Brown, D. K. Ulrich

1970
Bill Dennis
Joe Frasson, Jim Vandiver, Talmadge Prince±

1969
Dick Brooks
Buddy Young, Hoss Ellington

1968
Pete Hamilton
Dave Marcis, Dr. Don Tarr

1967
Donnie Allison
Charlie Glotzbach, Paul Dean Holt

1966
James Hylton♦
Bill Seifert, Frank Warren

1965
Sam McQuagg
Henley Gray, Clyde Lynn[N 1]

1964
Doug Cooper
J. T. Putney, Buddy Arrington

1963
Billy Wade
Bobby Isaac, Larry Manning, J. D. McDuffie

1962
Thomas Cox
Cale Yarborough, Ed Livingston

1961
Woodie Wilson
Wendell Scott, Lee Reitzel

1960
David Pearson
Gerald Duke, Paul Lewis

1959
Richard Petty
Fritz Wilson, Buddy Baker, Bob Burdick

1958
Shorty Rollins

1957
Ken Rush

1956
not awarded

1955
not awarded

1954
Blackie Pitt æ

text: Xfinity Series[edit]

text: Announced 2018 ROTY contenders[edit]

text:
Christopher Bell[8]
Spencer Boyd[9]
Chad Finchum[10]
Kaz Grala[11]
Vinnie Miller[12]

text: History[edit]

text:
Year
Winner
Runner(s) Up

2017
William Byron
Cole Custer, Daniel Hemric, Matt Tifft, Spencer Gallagher, Ben Kennedy, Tyler Reddick†, Brandon Brown†, Christopher Bell¶

2016
Erik Jones
Brennan Poole, Brandon Jones, Ryan Preece, Garrett Smithley, Ray Black Jr., B. J. McLeod, Cody Ware*, Corey LaJoie†, Martin Roy†, Todd Peck†, Matt Tifft¶, Spencer Gallagher¶

2015
Daniel Suárez
Darrell Wallace Jr., Ross Chastain, Cale Conley, Harrison Rhodes, Peyton Sellers, Josh Reaume, Ryan Blaney†, Ben Rhodes†, Mario Gosselin†, Dylan Lupton†, Derek White†, Jimmy Weller III†, Erik Jones¶, B. J. McLeod¶

2014
Chase Elliott
Ty Dillon, Chris Buescher, Ryan Reed, Dylan Kwasniewski, Dakoda Armstrong, Ryan Sieg, Tanner Berryhill, Chad Boat, Tommy Joe Martins, Harrison Rhodes*, David Starr†, Carlos Contreras†, Ryan Ellis†, Ryan Blaney¶, Cale Conley¶

2013
Kyle Larson
Alex Bowman, Nelson Piquet Jr., Jeffrey Earnhardt, Kevin Swindell, Dexter Stacey, Hal Martin, Juan Carlos Blum, Ty Dillon¶

2012
Austin Dillon
Cole Whitt, Jason Bowles, Brad Sweet, Johanna Long, Joey Gase, Casey Roderick, Benny Gordon, Jamie Dick†, Josh Richards†, Travis Pastrana†, Daryl Harr†, Tim Schendel†, Ryan Blaney¶

2011
Timmy Hill
Blake Koch, Ryan Truex, Jennifer Jo Cobb, Charles Lewandoski, Carl Long†, Tim Andrews†

2010
Ricky Stenhouse Jr.
Brian Scott, Colin Braun, James Buescher, Parker Kligerman, Tayler Malsam†, Danica Patrick†

2009
Justin Allgaier
Brendan Gaughan, Michael Annett, Michael McDowell, Erik Darnell, Scott Lagasse Jr., John Wes Townley, Ken Butler III, Terry Cook, Peyton Sellers, Marc Davis*, Trevor Bayne†, Shelby Howard†, Matt Carter†, Kevin Conway†, Jeremy Clements†

2008
Landon Cassill
Bryan Clauson, Dario Franchitti, Cale Gale, Brian Keselowski, Chase Miller, Patrick Carpentier, Joey Logano†, Josh Wise†, Danny Efland†, Brandon Whitt†, Justin Hobgood†

2007
David Ragan
Marcos Ambrose, Brad Keselowski, Kyle Krisiloff, Brad Coleman, Juan Pablo Montoya, Robert Richardson Jr., Sam Hornish Jr., Justin Diercks*, Timothy Peters*, Bobby Santos III*, Alex García*, Brian Conz*, Kelly Bires†, Richard Johns†, Bobby East†, D. J. Kennington†, Brett Rowe†

2006
Danny O'Quinn Jr.
John Andretti, Todd Kluever, Burney Lamar, Mark McFarland, Stephen Leicht, David Gilliland, Tracy Hines, Joel Kauffman, A. J. Foyt IV*, Jorge Goeters*, Kevin Conway*, Chris Wimmer*, Auggie Vidovich II†, David Reutimann†, Steve Wallace†, Aric Almirola†, Shane Huffman†

2005
Carl Edwards
Reed Sorenson, Denny Hamlin, Jon Wood, Brent Sherman, Kertus Davis, Michel Jourdain Jr., Tyler Walker, Ryan Hemphill, Brandon Miller, Paul Wolfe, Boston Reid*, A. J. Fike*, Blake Feese*, Kim Crosby*, Donnie Neuenberger*, Jerry Robertson†

2004
Kyle Busch
Clint Bowyer, Paul Menard, J. J. Yeley, Billy Parker, Stan Boyd, Travis Geisler, Donnie Neuenberger*, Rick Markle*, Kevin Conway*, Brian Conz*, Aaron Fike†, Andy Ponstein†, Tina Gordon†

2003
David Stremme
Coy Gibbs, Joey Clanton, Chad Blount, Jason White, Chase Montgomery, Regan Smith, Damon Lusk, Chris Bingham, Martin Truex Jr.†, Tammy Jo Kirk†

2002
Scott Riggs
Johnny Sauter, Shane Hmiel, Kerry Earnhardt, Casey Mears, Brian Vickers, Kasey Kahne, Dan Pardus, Larry Gunselman†, Ron Young†, Brian Weber†, Joe Buford†

2001
Greg Biffle
Scott Wimmer, Jamie McMurray, Larry Foyt, Tim Sauter, Marty Houston, David Donohue, Ryan Newman†, Kelly Denton†, Brad Baker†, Christian Elder†, Steadman Marlin†, Ken Alexander†, Bill Hoff†

2000
Kevin Harvick
Ron Hornaday Jr., Jimmie Johnson, Jay Sauter, Michael Ritch*, P. J. Jones, Anthony Lazzaro, Mike Stefanik, Mike Borkowski, Derrick Gilchrist, Kelly Denton*, Jay Fogleman*, Dave Steele*

1999
Tony Raines
Hank Parker Jr., Adam Petty, Bobby Hamilton Jr., Tony Roper, Andy Kirby, Jimmy Kitchens, Ted Christopher*, Kelly Denton* Phillip Morris*, Kerry Earnhardt*, Skip Smith*

1998
Andy Santerre
Dave Blaney, Blaise Alexander, Kevin Grubb, Wayne Grubb, Casey Atwood, Mike Cope, Matt Hutter, Lance Hooper, Jason Jarrett, Kevin Schwantz, Brad Loney, Hank Parker Jr.*, Mike Stefanik*, Ashton Lewis Jr.†

1997
Steve Park
Matt Kenseth, Johnny Chapman, Mark Krogh, Jeff Krogh, Lyndon Amick, Chris Diamond, Jimmy Foster, Jeff McClure, Dale Earnhardt Jr., Tim Bender, Doug Reid III, Stanton Barrett, Tim Steele, David Hutto*, Tim Steele†, Scott Lagasse†, Dale Fischlein†

1996
Glenn Allen Jr.
Mike Dillon, Shane Hall, Mark Green, Tony Stewart, Mike Harmon, Jerry Nadeau*, Johnny Chapman*, Tim Bender*, Pete Orr*, Andy Hillenburg*, Jimmy Kitchens*, Greg Clark*, Mike Laughlin Jr.*, Elliott Sadler†, Ron Barfield Jr.†

1995
Jeff Fuller
Curtis Markham, Kirk Shelmerdine, L.W. Miller, David Bonnett, Greg Clark*, John Tanner*, Tim Bender*, Dale Williams*

1994
Johnny Benson Jr.
Dennis Setzer, Kevin Lepage, Stevie Reeves, Randy Porter, Dirk Stephens, Johnny Rumley, Mike Garvey, Robbie Reiser, Chad Chaffin, Michael Ritch*, Kirk Shelmerdine*, Mike Stefanik*, George Crenshaw*, Jeff Neal*, Andy Hillenburg*

1993
Hermie Sadler
Joe Bessey, Tim Fedewa, Roy Payne, Nathan Buttke, Jason Keller, Michael Ritch*, Tom Hessert*, Alan Russell*, Ken Wallace*, Page Jones*

1992
Ricky Craven^
Shawna Robinson, Robert Huffman*, Randy MacDonald*, Greg Trammell*

1991
Jeff Gordon
David Green, Tracy Leslie, Troy Beebe, Cecil Eunice, Richard Lasater, Jeff Green, Mike Wallace, Mike Oliver, Mike McLaughlin, Rich Burgess*, Shawna Robinson*

1990
Joe Nemechek
Bobby Moon, Ward Burton, Jack Sprague, Dana Patten, Davey Johnson, Dave Mader III, Ed Ferree, Frank Fleming, Clifford Allison*

1989
Kenny Wallace
Bobby Hamilton, Jeff Burton, Dave Rezendes, Robert Pressley, Brandon Baker, Dave Simpson, Ed Ferree*, Tom Harrington*

text: ^ Craven started seven races in 1991 (the limit was five) but was charged with only two starts. The other five starts were in combination races with the Busch North Series, where he raced as a regular. Both 1991 Busch Series wins were in combination races as a North driver.

text: Camping World Truck Series[edit]

text: Announced 2018 ROTY contenders[edit]

text:
Justin Fontaine
Salvatore Iovino

text: History[edit]

text:
Year
Winner
Runner(s) Up

2017
Chase Briscoe
Grant Enfinger, Noah Gragson, Austin Cindric, Kaz Grala, Justin Haley, Cody Coughlin, Stewart Friesen, Wendell Chavous, Austin Hill†, Josh Reaume†, Camden Murphy†

2016
William Byron
Christopher Bell, Cole Custer, Ben Rhodes, Rico Abreu, Austin Wayne Self, Matt Tifft, Grant Enfinger*, Cody Coughlin*, Ryan Truex†, Tommy Joe Martins†, Brandon Brown†

2015
Erik Jones
John Hunter Nemechek, Cameron Hayley, Daniel Hemric, Brandon Jones, Spencer Gallagher, Ray Black Jr., Korbin Forrister, Austin Theriault, Justin Boston, Wendell Chavous*, Cody Ware*, Jordan Anderson†, Tyler Tanner†, Ryan Ellis†

2014
Ben Kennedy
Tyler Reddick, Mason Mingus, Tyler Young, Jimmy Weller III, Chase Pistone*, Justin Jennings†

2013
Ryan Blaney
Darrell Wallace, Jr., Jeb Burton, Germán Quiroga, Brennan Newberry, Ryan Truex*

2012
Ty Dillon
Cale Gale, Ross Chastain, John Wes Townley, Dakoda Armstrong, Bryan Silas, Max Gresham, Paulie Harraka, Caleb Holman*, John King*, Jeb Burton*, Dusty Davis*, Tyler Young*, T. J. Duke*, Tim George, Jr.†, Jeff Agnew†

2011
Joey Coulter
Nelson Piquet, Jr., Cole Whitt, Parker Kligerman, Miguel Paludo, Johanna Long, Craig Goess, Jeffrey Earnhardt*, Justin Johnson*, Dusty Davis*, Chase Mattioli*, Chris Eggleston*, Blake Feese†, Josh Richards†

2010
Austin Dillon
Justin Lofton, Jennifer Jo Cobb, Brett Butler, Chris Eggleston*, Dillon Oliver*, Landon Cassill*, Narain Karthikeyan†, Brad Sweet†, Mike Garvey†, Clay Greenfield†, Carl Long†, Chris Lafferty†

2009
Johnny Sauter
Tayler Malsam, James Buescher, Ricky Carmichael, J. R. Fitzpatrick, Brian Ickler, Brent Raymer, Chris Jones, Chase Austin*, Ryan Hackett*, Mario Gosselin†, Ryan Sieg†, Nick Tucker†, Chris Fontaine†

2008
Colin Braun
Brian Scott, Scott Speed, Donny Lia, Justin Marks, Marc Mitchell, Andy Lally, Phillip McGilton*, Michael Annett†, Ryan Lawler†, Keven Wood†, J. C. Stout†, Norm Benning†

2007
Willie Allen
Tim Sauter, Joey Clanton, Jason White, Blake Bjorklund, Aaron Fike, Tyler Walker*, Kelly Bires*, Peter Shepherd*, Kevin Hamlin*, Casey Kingsland*, Brian Sockwell*, Ryan Mathews†, Clay Rogers†, Josh Wise†, Scott Lynch†

2006
Erik Darnell
Chad McCumbee, Marcos Ambrose, Aric Almirola, Bobby East, Kerry Earnhardt, Erin Crocker, Boston Reid, Joey Miller, Robert Richardson, Jr., Kraig Kinser, Scott Lagasse, Jr., Ryan Moore, Michel Jourdain, Jr.*, Sean Murphy*, J. R. Patton*, Tam Topham*, Chase Miller†

2005
Todd Kluever
Timothy Peters, Shigeaki Hattori, Regan Smith, Clay Rogers*, Jimmy Kite*, Nick Tucker*, Kerry Earnhardt*

2004
David Reutimann
Tracy Hines, Robert Huffman, Brandon Whitt, Chase Montgomery, Shane Sieg, Kelly Sutton, Ken Weaver, Chris Wimmer, Shelby Howard, Brad Keselowski, Hank Parker, Jr.†, Deborah Renshaw†, David Ragan†

2003
Carl Edwards
Jody Lavender, Randy Briggs, T. J. Bell, Tina Gordon, Doug Keller, Teri MacDonald*, Kenny Hendrick†, Roland Isaacs†

2002
Brendan Gaughan
Bill Lester, Jason Small, Dana White, Trent Owens*, Rodney Sawyers*, Loni Richardson*, Aaron Daniel*, Randy Briggs*, Angie Wilson*, Donnie Neuenberger*, Eric Jones†

2001
Travis Kvapil
Ricky Hendrick, Matt Crafton, Billy Bigley, Jon Wood, Willy T. Ribbs, Brian Rose, Nathan Haseleu, Larry Gunselman, Chuck Hossfeld, Ricky Sanders, Jason White*, Jason Small*, Bill Lester*, Mark Petty*, Tom Carey, Jr.†, Jonathon Price†

2000
Kurt Busch
Carlos Contreras, Scott Riggs, Jamie McMurray, Rick Ware, Wayne Edwards, Coy Gibbs, Kenny Martin, Donny Morelock*, J. D. Gibbs*, Andy Genzman†

1999
Mike Stefanik
Scott Hansen, David Starr, Marty Houston, Tim Steele, Ryan McGlynn, Phil Bonifield, Ernie Cope*, Mike Clark*, Nipper Alsup*, Randy Nelson*

1998
Greg Biffle
Andy Houston, Scot Walters, Wayne Anderson, Kevin Cywinski, Dominic Dobson, Rob Morgan, Rick McCray, Randy Nelson*, David Starr*, Joe Gaita*, Billy Pauch*, Joe Bush*, Tommy Archer*, Mike Hope*, Freddie Query*, Andy Michner*, Dave Stacy*, Jimmy Davis*, Monty Klein*, Randy MacDonald†, B. A. Wilson†, Tom Hubert†

1997
Kenny Irwin, Jr.
Rick Crawford, Stacy Compton, Tony Raines, Boris Said, Tony Roper, Tammy Jo Kirk, Randy Tolsma, Terry Cook, Kevin Harvick, Rob Rizzo, Lonnie Rush, Jr., Kelly Denton, Mike Cope, Andy Genzman*, Toby Porter*, Brandon Butler*, Kenny Hendrick*, Bob Schacht*, Mike Colabucci*, Dave Smith*, Brian Cunningham†, Barry Bodine†

1996
Bryan Reffner
Doug George, Lance Norick, Bobby Gill, Jay Sauter, Lonnie Cox, Charlie Cragan, Ron Barfield, Jr., Butch Gilliland, Joe Gaita*, Kevin Harvick* Dave Smith*, Joe Madore*, Steve Mendenhall*, Rodney Combs, Jr.*, Terry McCarthy*, Jerry Robertson*, Doug Thorpe, Jr.*, Rick Markle*, Mark Gibson†, Ricky Johnson†, Randy Renfrow†, Dan Press†