Randomized non-comparative trials: an oxymoron?

This 2022 publication on “Augmented” RCTs seems like it might be describing a precursor to the study design that’s now being called the “Randomized Non-Comparative Trial (RNCT)” (?)

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10089586/

Freidlin B, Korn EL. Augmenting randomized clinical trial data with historical control data: Precision medicine applications. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2023 Jan 10;115(1):14-20.

An excerpt:

“To mitigate concerns associated with nonrandomized studies that rely solely on historical controls, Pocock (18) suggested a design in which data from the control arm of a RCT is augmented with data from an “acceptable” historical control cohort. (“Historical control cohort” is used throughout as a shorthand for a nonrandomized control cohort.) The criteria given for when the historical data would be acceptable were quite stringent (Box 1)…In general, however, the Pocock criteria would rarely be satisfied. In particular, any time trends in the patient population, ancillary care, or diagnostic/response methodology can lead to a violation of Pocock criteria and misleading results (20).”

Reference #18 seems like it might represent the origin of the practice (?):

1. Pocock SJ. The combination of randomized and historical controls in clinical trials. J Chronic Dis. 1976;29(3):175-188.

I don’t understand statistics well enough to be able to highlight differences between what Pocock was proposing back in 1976 and what RNCT authors are actually doing today. It seems like Pocock was suggesting that, if certain strict criteria were met, it might be possible to “augment” the control arm of an RCT with historical data. But this is different than ignoring the RCT control arm data altogether and, rather than borrowing data from a historical control, simply comparing a new drug arm with a control arm from a historical study (?) Is this what RNCT authors are doing?