INVESTIGATING THE EFFICACY OF CLINICAL TRIAL MONITORING STRATEGIES: Design and Implementation of the Cluster Randomized START Monitoring Substudy.

BACKGROUND: Trial monitoring protects participant safety and study integrity. While monitors commonly go on-site to verify source data, there is little evidence that this practice is efficient or effective. An ongoing international HIV treatment trial (START) provides an opportunity to explore the usefulness of different monitoring approaches. METHODS: All START sites are centrally monitored and required to follow a local monitoring plan requiring specific quality assurance activities. Additionally, sites were randomized (1:1) to receive, or not receive, annual on-site monitoring. The study will determine if on-site monitoring increases the identification of major protocol deviations (eligibility or consent violations, improper study drug use, primary or serious event underreporting, data alteration or fraud). RESULTS: The START study completed enrollment in December 2013, with planned follow-up through December 2016. The monitoring study is ongoing at 196 sites in 34 countries. Results are expected when the START study concludes in December 2016.

A Brief Chronicle of CD4 as a Biomarker for HIV/AIDS: A Tribute to the Memory of John L. Fahey.

Foundational cellular immunology research of the 1960s and 1970s, together with the advent of monoclonal antibodies and flow cytometry, provided the knowledge base and the technological capability that enabled the elucidation of the role of CD4 T cells in HIV infection. Research identifying the sources and magnitude of variation in CD4 measurements, standardized reagents and protocols, and the development of clinical flow cytometers all contributed to the feasibility of widespread CD4 testing. Cohort studies and clinical trials provided the context for establishing the utility of CD4 for prognosis in HIV-infected persons, initial assessment of in vivo antiretroviral drug activity, and as a surrogate marker for clinical outcome in antiretroviral therapeutic trials. Even with sensitive HIV viral load measurement, CD4 cell counting is still utilized in determining antiretroviral therapy eligibility and time to initiate therapy. New point of care technologies are helping both to lower the cost of CD4 testing and enable its use in HIV test and treat programs around the world.

Evaluating protocol lifecycle time intervals in HIV/AIDS clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Identifying efficacious interventions for the prevention and treatment of human diseases depends on the efficient development and implementation of controlled clinical trials. Essential to reducing the time and burden of completing the clinical trial lifecycle is determining which aspects take the longest, delay other stages, and may lead to better resource utilization without diminishing scientific quality, safety, or the protection of human subjects. PURPOSE: In this study, we modeled time-to-event data to explore relationships between clinical trial protocol development and implementation times, as well as to identify potential correlates of prolonged development and implementation. METHODS: We obtained time interval and participant accrual data from 111 interventional clinical trials initiated between 2006 and 2011 by National Institutes of Health's HIV/AIDS Clinical Trials Networks. We determined the time (in days) required to complete defined phases of clinical trial protocol development and implementation. Kaplan-Meier estimates were used to assess the rates at which protocols reached specified terminal events, stratified by study purpose (therapeutic, prevention) and phase group (pilot/phase I, phase II, and phase III/IV). We also examined several potential correlates to prolonged development and implementation intervals. RESULTS: Even though phase grouping did not determine development or implementation times of either therapeutic or prevention studies, overall we observed wide variation in protocol development times. Moreover, we detected a trend toward phase III/IV therapeutic protocols exhibiting longer developmental (median 2½ years) and implementation times (>3 years). We also found that protocols exceeding the median number of days for completing the development interval had significantly longer implementation. LIMITATIONS: The use of a relatively small set of protocols may have limited our ability to detect differences across phase groupings. Some timing effects present for a specific study phase may have been masked by combining protocols into phase groupings. Presence of informative censoring, such as withdrawal of some protocols from development if they began showing signs of lost interest among investigators, complicates interpretation of Kaplan-Meier estimates. Because this study constitutes a retrospective examination over an extended period of time, it does not allow for the precise identification of relative factors impacting timing. CONCLUSION: Delays not only increase the time and cost to complete clinical trials but they also diminish their usefulness by failing to answer research questions in time. We believe that research analyzing the time spent traversing defined intervals across the clinical trial protocol development and implementation continuum can stimulate business process analyses and re-engineering efforts that could lead to reductions in the time from clinical trial concept to results, thereby accelerating progress in clinical research.

Modeling the dissemination and uptake of clinical trials results.

A select set of highly cited publications from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) HIV/AIDS Clinical Trials Networks was used to illustrate the integration of time interval and citation data, modeling the progression, dissemination, and uptake of primary research findings. Following a process marker approach, the pace of initial utilization of this research was measured as the time from trial conceptualization, development and implementation, through results dissemination and uptake. Compared to earlier studies of clinical research, findings suggest that select HIV/AIDS trial results are disseminated and utilized relatively rapidly. Time-based modeling of publication results as they meet specific citation milestones enabled the observation of points at which study results were present in the literature summarizing the evidence in the field. Evaluating the pace of clinical research, results dissemination, and knowledge uptake in synthesized literature can help establish realistic expectations for the time course of clinical trials research and their relative impact toward influencing clinical practice.

Community-researcher partnerships at NIAID HIV/AIDS clinical trials sites: insights for evaluation and enhancement.

BACKGROUND: Community engagement has been a cornerstone of National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID)'s HIV/AIDS clinical trials programs since 1990. Stakeholders now consider this critical to success, hence the impetus to develop evaluation approaches. OBJECTIVES: The purpose was to assess the extent to which community advisory boards (CABs) at HIV/AIDS trials sites are being integrated into research activities. METHODS: CABs and research staff (RS) at NIAID research sites were surveyed for how each viewed (a) the frequency of activities indicative of community involvement, (b) the means for identifying, prioritizing, and supporting CAB needs, and (c) mission and operational challenges. RESULTS: Overall, CABs and RS share similar views about the frequency of community involvement activities. Cluster analysis reveals three groups of sites based on activity frequency ratings, including a group notable for CAB-RS discordance. CONCLUSIONS: Assessing differences between community and researcher perceptions about the frequency of and challenges posed by specific engagement activities may prove useful in developing evaluation tools for assessing community engagement in collaborative research settings.

The NIAID Division of AIDS enterprise information system: integrated decision support for global clinical research programs.

The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) Division of AIDS (DAIDS) Enterprise Information System (DAIDS-ES) is a web-based system that supports NIAID in the scientific, strategic, and tactical management of its global clinical research programs for HIV/AIDS vaccines, prevention, and therapeutics. Different from most commercial clinical trials information systems, which are typically protocol-driven, the DAIDS-ES was built to exchange information with those types of systems and integrate it in ways that help scientific program directors lead the research effort and keep pace with the complex and ever-changing global HIV/AIDS pandemic. Whereas commercially available clinical trials support systems are not usually disease-focused, DAIDS-ES was specifically designed to capture and incorporate unique scientific, demographic, and logistical aspects of HIV/AIDS treatment, prevention, and vaccine research in order to provide a rich source of information to guide informed decision-making. Sharing data across its internal components and with external systems, using defined vocabularies, open standards and flexible interfaces, the DAIDS-ES enables NIAID, its global collaborators and stakeholders, access to timely, quality information about NIAID-supported clinical trials which is utilized to: (1) analyze the research portfolio, assess capacity, identify opportunities, and avoid redundancies; (2) help support study safety, quality, ethics, and regulatory compliance; (3) conduct evidence-based policy analysis and business process re-engineering for improved efficiency. This report summarizes how the DAIDS-ES was conceptualized, how it differs from typical clinical trial support systems, the rationale for key design choices, and examples of how it is being used to advance the efficiency and effectiveness of NIAID's HIV/AIDS clinical research programs.

Evaluating research and impact: a bibliometric analysis of research by the NIH/NIAID HIV/AIDS clinical trials networks.

Evaluative bibliometrics uses advanced techniques to assess the impact of scholarly work in the context of other scientific work and usually compares the relative scientific contributions of research groups or institutions. Using publications from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) HIV/AIDS extramural clinical trials networks, we assessed the presence, performance, and impact of papers published in 2006-2008. Through this approach, we sought to expand traditional bibliometric analyses beyond citation counts to include normative comparisons across journals and fields, visualization of co-authorship across the networks, and assess the inclusion of publications in reviews and syntheses. Specifically, we examined the research output of the networks in terms of the a) presence of papers in the scientific journal hierarchy ranked on the basis of journal influence measures, b) performance of publications on traditional bibliometric measures, and c) impact of publications in comparisons with similar publications worldwide, adjusted for journals and fields. We also examined collaboration and interdisciplinarity across the initiative, through network analysis and modeling of co-authorship patterns. Finally, we explored the uptake of network produced publications in research reviews and syntheses. Overall, the results suggest the networks are producing highly recognized work, engaging in extensive interdisciplinary collaborations, and having an impact across several areas of HIV-related science. The strengths and limitations of the approach for evaluation and monitoring research initiatives are discussed.

Integrating utilization-focused evaluation with business process modeling for clinical research improvement.

New discoveries in basic science are creating extraordinary opportunities to design novel biomedical preventions and therapeutics for human disease. But the clinical evaluation of these new interventions is, in many instances, being hindered by a variety of legal, regulatory, policy and operational factors, few of which enhance research quality, the safety of study participants or research ethics. With the goal of helping increase the efficiency and effectiveness of clinical research, we have examined how the integration of utilization-focused evaluation with elements of business process modeling can reveal opportunities for systematic improvements in clinical research. Using data from the NIH global HIV/AIDS clinical trials networks, we analyzed the absolute and relative times required to traverse defined phases associated with specific activities within the clinical protocol lifecycle. Using simple median duration and Kaplan-Meyer survival analysis, we show how such time-based analyses can provide a rationale for the prioritization of research process analysis and re-engineering, as well as a means for statistically assessing the impact of policy modifications, resource utilization, re-engineered processes and best practices. Successfully applied, this approach can help researchers be more efficient in capitalizing on new science to speed the development of improved interventions for human disease.

Developing a conceptual framework for an evaluation system for the NIAID HIV/AIDS clinical trials networks.

Globally, health research organizations are called upon to re-examine their policies and practices to more efficiently and effectively address current scientific and social needs, as well as increasing public demands for accountability.Through a case study approach, the authors examine an effort undertaken by the National Institute of Allergy & Infectious Diseases (part of the National Institutes of Health, Department of Health & Human Services, United States Government) to develop an evaluation system for its recently restructured HIV/AIDS clinical trials program. The challenges in designing, operationalizing, and managing global clinical trials programs are considered in the context of large scale scientific research initiatives.Through a process of extensive stakeholder input, a framework of success factors was developed that enables both a prospective view of the elements that must be addressed in an evaluation of this research and a current state assessment of the extent to which the goals of the restructuring are understood by stakeholders across the DAIDS clinical research networks.