Lessons learned: Infrastructure development and financial management for large, publicly funded, international trials.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Randomized clinical trials are widely recognized as essential to address worldwide clinical and public health research questions. However, their size and duration can overwhelm available public and private resources. To remain competitive in international research settings, advocates and practitioners of clinical trials must implement practices that reduce their cost. We identify approaches and practices for large, publicly funded, international trials that reduce cost without compromising data integrity and recommend an approach to cost reporting that permits comparison of clinical trials. METHODS: We describe the organizational and financial characteristics of The International Network for Strategic Initiatives in Global HIV Trials, an infectious disease research network that conducts multiple, large, long-term, international trials, and examine challenges associated with simple and streamlined governance and an infrastructure and financial management model that is based on performance, transparency, and accountability. RESULTS: It is possible to reduce costs of participants' follow-up and not compromise clinical trial quality or integrity. The International Network for Strategic Initiatives in Global HIV Trials network has successfully completed three large HIV trials using cost-efficient practices that have not adversely affected investigator enthusiasm, accrual rates, loss-to-follow-up, adherence to the protocol, and completion of data collection. This experience is relevant to the conduct of large, publicly funded trials in other disease areas, particularly trials dependent on international collaborations. CONCLUSION: New approaches, or creative adaption of traditional clinical trial infrastructure and financial management tools, can render large, international clinical trials more cost-efficient by emphasizing structural simplicity, minimal up-front costs, payments for performance, and uniform algorithms and fees-for-service, irrespective of location. However, challenges remain. They include institutional resistance to financial change, growing trial complexity, and the difficulty of sustaining network infrastructure absent stable research work. There is also a need for more central monitoring, improved and harmonized regulations, and a widely applied metric for measuring and comparing cost efficiency in clinical trials. ClinicalTrials.gov is recommended as a location where standardized trial cost information could be made publicly accessible.

Implementation of an Ebola virus disease vaccine clinical trial during the Ebola epidemic in Liberia: Design, procedures, and challenges.

The index case of the Ebola virus disease epidemic in West Africa is believed to have originated in Guinea. By June 2014, Guinea, Liberia, and Sierra Leone were in the midst of a full-blown and complex global health emergency. The devastating effects of this Ebola epidemic in West Africa put the global health response in acute focus for urgent international interventions. Accordingly, in October 2014, a World Health Organization high-level meeting endorsed the concept of a phase 2/3 clinical trial in Liberia to study Ebola vaccines. As a follow-up to the global response, in November 2014, the Government of Liberia and the US Government signed an agreement to form a research partnership to investigate Ebola and to assess intervention strategies for treating, controlling, and preventing the disease in Liberia. This agreement led to the establishment of the Joint Liberia-US Partnership for Research on Ebola Virus in Liberia as the beginning of a long-term collaborative partnership in clinical research between the two countries. In this article, we discuss the methodology and related challenges associated with the implementation of the Ebola vaccines clinical trial, based on a double-blinded randomized controlled trial, in Liberia.

Regulatory impediments jeopardizing the conduct of clinical trials in Europe funded by the National Institutes of Health.

BACKGROUND: A number of reports have highlighted problems of conducting publicly funded trials in Europe as a consequence of the European Union (EU) Clinical Trials Directive. The impact of the EU Directive on multi-national trials, which include sites in Europe that are funded by the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) have not been described. METHODS: Four problems in the conduct of two international HIV treatment trials funded by NIH in the EU are described: (1) conflicting regulations on the continuing review of protocols by Institutional Review Boards/Research Ethics Committees; (2) US regulations requiring Federalwide Assurances for sites which are only partially funded by NIH; (3) EU guidance on the designation of studies as a trial of an investigational medicinal product; and (4) EU guidance on trial sponsorship and the requirements for insurance and indemnification. Following the description of the problems, recommendations for improving global collaborations are made to the US Office of Human Research Protections, to NIH, and to the EU and its Member States. RESULTS: A lack of harmonization of regulations at multiple levels caused enrollment in one study to be interrupted for several months and delayed for one year the initiation of another study aimed at obtaining definitive evidence to guide the timing of the initiation of antiretroviral therapy for individuals infected with HIV. The delays and the purchase of insurance resulted in substantial increases in trial costs and caused substantial disruption at clinical sites among staff and study participants. LIMITATIONS: The problems cited and recommendations made pertain to trials funded by NIH and conducted by sites in the EU. There are many other challenges in the conduct of international research, public and private, that global harmonization would alleviate. CONCLUSIONS: Disharmony, at multiple levels, in international regulations and guidelines is stifling publicly funded global research. International scientific organizations and government groups should make the documentation and solution of these problems a priority.

Investigation of microphones as near-ground sensors for seismic detection of buried landmines.

Commercially available microphones were investigated as near-ground sensors to measure the acoustic pressure and the vertical pressure gradient of evanescent air-acoustic waves associated with audio-frequency seismic waves. Measurements in close proximity to the surface and the use of waveguides were found to improve the microphone signal's quality, the comparison of its seismic sensitivity to its sensitivity to propagating sound (ambient acoustic noise and nonseismic reverberation). Landmine images formed using microphone data collected in a laboratory experimental model clearly locate buried inert landmines but exhibit more clutter than images of the same objects formed with seismic displacement data collected using other techniques.

Conventional Wisdom versus Actual Outcomes: Challenges in the Conduct of an Ebola Vaccine Trial in Liberia during the International Public Health Emergency.

Clinical trials are challenging endeavors. Planning and implementing an investigational vaccine trial in Liberia, in the midst of an Ebola virus disease (EVD) epidemic that World Health Organization classified a public health emergency of international concern, presented extraordinary challenges. Normally, years of preparation and a litany of tasks lay the groundwork for a successful, randomized, blinded, placebo-controlled trial focused on safety and efficacy. Difficult research settings, unpredictable events, and other unique circumstances can add complexity. The setting in Liberia was especially problematic due to an infrastructure still badly damaged following a lengthy civil war and a very fragile health-care system that was further devastated by the EVD outbreak. The Partnership for Research on Vaccines in Liberia I EVD vaccine trial was planned and implemented in less than 3 months by a Liberian and U.S. research partnership, and its Phase II substudy was fully enrolled 3 months later. Contrasting conventional wisdom with trial outcomes offers an opportunity to compare early assumptions, barriers encountered, and adaptive strategies used, with end results. Understanding what was learned can inform future trial responses when disease outbreaks, especially in resource-poor locations with minimal infrastructure, pose a significant threat to public health.