Biofield therapies: Guidelines for reporting clinical trials.

A set of guidelines has been developed to help improve reporting of clinical trials of biofield therapies. The need for enhanced transparency when reporting trials of this family of integrative health practices, e.g., External Qigong, Healing Touch, Reiki and Therapeutic Touch, has been advocated in systematic reviews of these studies. The guidelines, called Biofield Therapies: Reporting Evidence Guidelines (BiFi REGs), supplement CONSORT 2010 by including details of the intervention protocols relevant to biofield therapy trials. BiFi REGs evolved through a draft document created by a core group, two rounds of a Delphi process with an international group of subject matter experts and two panels, meeting via Zoom, which included editors of complementary and integrative medicine journals. BiFi REGs comprises a 15-item Intervention checklist. Modifications of two other CONSORT topic areas are also proposed to enhance their relevance to trials of biofield therapies. Included for each item are an explanation, and exemplars of reporting from peer-reviewed published reports of biofield therapy trials. When used in conjunction with all other items from CONSORT 2010, we anticipate that BiFi REGs will expedite the peer review process for biofield therapy trials, facilitate attempts at trial replication and help to inform decision-making in the clinical practice of biofield therapies.

Practical Guidelines for Standardised Resolution of Important Protocol Deviations in Clinical Trials Conducted in Sub-Saharan Africa.

A clinical trial is any research on human subjects that involves an investigational medicinal product or device. Investigational medicinal products include unlicensed drugs or drugs used outside the product license (e.g. for a new indication) (ICH-GCP). As per the internationally accepted ICH-GCP guidelines, clinical trials should be conducted strictly per the approved protocol. However, during the lifecycle of a trial, protocol deviations may occur. Under ICH efficacy guidelines, protocol deviations are divided into non-important (minor) or important (major), and the latter can jeopardise the participant's rights, safety or the quality of data generated by the study. Existing guidelines on protocol deviation management do not detail or standardise actions to be taken for participants, investigational products, data or samples as part of a holistic management of important protocol deviations. Herein, we propose guidelines to address the current literature gap and promote the standardisation of actions to address important protocol deviations in clinical trials. The advised actions should complement the existing local institutional review board and national regulatory authority requirements.

High frequency of spin bias in controlled trials of cannabis derivatives and their synthetic analogues: A meta-epidemiologic study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the frequency and perform a qualitative analysis of spin bias in publications of controlled trials assessing the therapeutic use of cannabis derivatives and their synthetic analogues. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Meta-epidemiologic study carried out at the Universidade Federal de São Paulo, Brazil. RESULTS: A total of 65 publications with at least one efficacy primary outcome were considered. The results analysis for the primary outcome indicated statistically significant effects in 44.6% (29/65) of the publications, and 70.7% (45/65) of the conclusions were considered favorable to the intervention. Among the 36 publications that found statistically nonsignificant results for the primary outcome, 44.4% (16/36) presented conclusions favorable to or recommending the intervention, which represents spin bias according to the definition adopted in this study. Qualitative analysis of the 16 studies with spin bias showed selective outcomes reporting (elevating secondary outcomes that had positive results or reporting only subgroup results), deviations from the planned statistical analysis, and failure to consider or report uncertainty in the estimates of treatment effects. CONCLUSION: The frequency of spin bias among publications of controlled trials with statistically nonsignificant results assessing the therapeutic use of cannabis derivatives and their synthetic analogues reached 44.4%. When not observed by readers, such deviation can lead to misconduct in clinical practice through the adoption of interventions that are not effective or whose effectiveness is uncertain.

Immune Monitoring for Advanced Cell Therapy Trials in Transplantation: Which Assays and When?

A number of immune regulatory cellular therapies, including regulatory T cells and mesenchymal stromal cells, have emerged as novel alternative therapies for the control of transplant alloresponses. Clinical studies have demonstrated their feasibility and safety, however developing our understanding of the impact of cellular therapeutics in vivo requires advanced immune monitoring strategies. To accurately monitor the immune response, a combination of complementary methods is required to measure the cellular and molecular phenotype as well as the function of cells involved. In this review we focus on the current immune monitoring strategies and discuss which methods may be utilized in the future.

The New S7B/E14 Question and Answer Draft Guidance for Industry: Contents and Commentary.

In August 2020, the International Council on Harmonisation (ICH) released a new draft document, which for the first time combined nonclinical (S7B) and clinical (E14) Questions and Answers (Q&As) into 1 document. FDA describes the revision as a "value proposition": if the human ether-à-go-go assay and the in vivo study are performed in a standardized way, the number of dedicated thorough QT (TQT) studies can be reduced. In this article, we describe and discuss the Q&As that relate to clinical ECG evaluation. If supported by negative standardized nonclinical assays, Q&A 5.1 will obviate the need for a TQT study in the case that a >2-fold exposure margin vs high clinical scenario cannot be obtained. Q&A 6.1 addresses drugs that are poorly tolerated in healthy subjects and cannot be studied at high doses or in placebo-controlled studies; it therefore mainly applies to oncology drugs. It will enable sponsors to claim that a new drug has a "low likelihood of proarrhythmic effects" in the case that the mean corrected QT effect is <10 milliseconds at the time of market application. The E14 2015 revision allowed application of concentration-corrected QT analysis on data from routinely performed clinical pharmacology studies, for example, the first-in-human study and the proportion of dedicated TQT studies has since steadily decreased. It can be foreseen that the proposed new revision will further reduce the number of TQT studies. To achieve harmonization across regulatory regions, it seems important to reach consensus within the International Council on Harmonisation group on the new threshold proposed in 6.1. For this purpose, the Implementation Working Group has asked for public comments.

The use of emerging safety biomarkers in nonclinical and clinical safety assessment - The current and future state: An IQ DruSafe industry survey.

Pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies rarely disclose their use of translational emerging safety biomarkers (ESBs) during drug development, and the impact of ESB use on the speed of drug development remains unclear. A cross-industry survey of 20 companies of varying size was conducted to understand current trends in ESB use and future use prospects. The objectives were to: (1) determine current ESB use in nonclinical and clinical drug development and impact on asset advancement; (2) identify opportunities, gaps, and challenges to greater ESB implementation; and (3) benchmark perspectives on regulatory acceptance. Although ESBs were employed in only 5-50% of studies/programs, most companies used ESBs to some extent, with larger companies demonstrating greater nonclinical use. Inclusion of ESBs in investigational new drug applications (INDs) was similar across all companies; however, differences in clinical trial usage could vary among the prevailing health authority (HA). Broader implementation of ESBs requires resource support, cross-industry partnerships, and collaboration with HAs. This includes generating sufficient foundational data, demonstrating nonclinical to clinical translatability and practical utility, and clearly written criteria by HAs to enable qualification. If achieved, ESBs will play a critical role in the development of next-generation, translationally-tailored standard laboratory tests for drug development.

Opioid-sparing effects of cannabinoids: Myth or reality?

A converging line of evidence is indicating that cannabinoids may have an opioid-sparing effect. This property, well validated in preclinical studies, allow when both drugs are co-administered to reduce the dose of opioids without loss of analgesic effects. A meta-analysis of pre-clinical studies indicated in 2017 that the median effective dose (ED50) of morphine administered in combination with delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (delta-9-THC) is 3.6 times lower than the ED50 of morphine alone (Nielsen et al., 2017). However, very few studies have been conducted in humans to validate this effect. This narrative review provides an update on whether or not cannabinoid drugs can be used to produce an opioid sparing effect. For this, various lines of evidence ranging from preclinical, epidemiological and human studies will be summarized. Overall, this review indicates that the preclinical results are strongly and consistently supportive of the presence of an opioid sparing effect of cannabinoid drugs. However, to date the clinical studies have been mostly negative; and, the evidence collected in humans so far is so limited that it is premature to conclude. Therefore, prospective high quality controlled clinical trials are still required to validate this. Priorities for future research are also discussed.

Creating a Program to Support Registering and Reporting Clinical Trials at Johns Hopkins University.

PROBLEM: The Food and Drug Administration Amendments Act of 2007 (FDAAA) and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) require that many clinical trials register and report results on ClinicalTrials.gov. Noncompliance with these policies denies research participants and scientists access to potentially relevant findings and could lead to monetary penalties or loss of funding. After discovering hundreds of potentially noncompliant trials affiliated with the institution, the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine (JHUSOM) sought to develop a program to support research teams with registration and reporting requirements. APPROACH: JHUSOM conducted a baseline assessment of institutional compliance in 2015, launched the ClinicalTrials.gov Program in June 2016, and expanded the program to the Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center in April 2018. The program is innovative in its comprehensive approach, and it was among the first to bring a large number of trials into compliance. OUTCOMES: From September 2015 to September 2020, JHUSOM brought completed and ongoing trials into compliance with FDAAA and NIH policies and maintained almost perfect compliance for new trials. During this period, the proportion of trials potentially noncompliant with the FDAAA decreased from 44% (339/774) to 2% (32/1,304). NEXT STEPS: JHUSOM continues to develop and evaluate tools and procedures that facilitate trial registration and results reporting. In collaboration with other academic medical centers, JHUSOM plans to share resources and to identify and disseminate best practices. This report identifies practical lessons for institutions that might develop similar programs.

Inclusion of pregnant women in COVID-19 treatment trials: a review and global call to action.

Inclusion of pregnant women in COVID-19 clinical trials would allow evaluation of effective therapies that might improve maternal health, pregnancy, and birth outcomes, and avoid the delay of developing treatment recommendations for pregnant women. We explored the inclusion of pregnant women in treatment trials of COVID-19 by reviewing ten international clinical trial registries at two timepoints in 2020. We identified 155 COVID-19 treatment studies of non-biological drugs for the April 7-10, 2020 timepoint, of which 124 (80%) specifically excluded pregnant women. The same registry search for the July 10-15, 2020 timepoint, yielded 722 treatment studies, of which 538 (75%) specifically excluded pregnant women. We then focused on studies that included at least one of six drugs (remdesivir, lopinavir-ritonavir, interferon beta, corticosteroids, chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine, and ivermectin) under evaluation for COVID-19. Of 176 such studies, 130 (74%) listed pregnancy as an exclusion criterion. Of 35 studies that evaluated high-dose vitamin treatment for COVID-19, 27 (77%) excluded pregnant women. Despite the surge in treatment studies for COVID-19, the proportion excluding pregnant women remains consistent. Exclusion was not well justified as many of the treatments being evaluated have no or low safety concerns during pregnancy. Inclusion of pregnant women in clinical treatment trials is urgently needed to identify effective COVID-19 treatment for this population.

National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health Perspectives on Clinical Research Involving Natural Products.

The sales of dietary supplements continue to increase year after year. Despite their use by a large percentage of Americans, there is little evidence for the vast majority of products regarding their safety or efficacy. National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health supports a broad range of research on dietary supplements, including clinical trials. Our experience with these trials has shaped our current policies and priorities for clinical research. This perspective outlines those policies and priorities that are shaping our investments going forward. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: The sales of dietary supplements continue to increase year after year. Despite their use by a large percentage of Americans, there is little evidence for the vast majority of products regarding their safety or efficacy. National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health supports a broad range of research on dietary supplements, including clinical trials. Our experience with these trials has shaped our current policies and priorities for clinical research. This perspective outlines those policies and priorities that are shaping our investments going forward.

[Discussion on contents and methods of quality control for acupuncture registry study].

To explore the basic principles and methods of quality control of clinical registry research in the field of acupuncture. This study drawed on the data quality control methods of clinical trials in the United States and combined clinical practice experience, based on the "International Patient Registry Platform of Acupuncture and Moxibustion", and the registry study of acupuncture treatment for early-onset ovarian insufficiency as a model. The principles of accuracy, authenticity, consistency and completeness were followed. A remote and on-site quality control method with remote quality control as the main and on-site quality control as the supplement is formed, with a view to providing ideas and reference for the quality control of registry research.

Cancer, immune suppression and Coronavirus Disease-19 (COVID-19): Need to manage drug safety (French Society for Oncology Pharmacy [SFPO] guidelines).

The Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic is disrupting our health environment. As expected, studies highlighted the great susceptibility of cancer patients to COVID-19 and more severe complications, leading oncologists to deeply rethink patient cancer care. This review is dedicated to the optimization of care pathways and therapeutics in cancer patients during the pandemic and aims to discuss successive issues. First we focused on the international guidelines proposing adjustments and alternative options to cancer care in order to limit hospital admission and cytopenic treatment in cancer patients, most of whom are immunocompromised. In addition cancer patients are prone to polypharmacy, enhancing the risk of drug-related problems as adverse events and drug-drug interactions. Due to increased risk in case of COVID-19, we reported a comprehensive review of all the drug-related problems between COVID-19 and antineoplastics. Moreover, in the absence of approved drug against COVID-19, infected patients may be included in clinical trials evaluating new drugs with a lack of knowledge, particularly in cancer patients. Focusing on the several experimental drugs currently being evaluated, we set up an original data board helping oncologists and pharmacists to identify promptly drug-related problems between antineoplastics and experimental drugs. Finally additional and concrete recommendations are provided, supporting oncologists and pharmacists in their efforts to manage cancer patients and to optimize their treatments in this new era related to COVID-19.

In Vitro Testing of Sunscreens for Dermal Absorption: A Platform for Product Selection for Maximal Usage Clinical Trials.

Sunscreen products contain UV filters as active ingredients for the protection of the skin against UVR. The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a new proposed rule in 2019 (84.FR.6204) for sunscreens and identified the need for additional safety data for certain UV filters including their dermal absorption data. Dermal absorption data reveal systemic exposure of UV filters in humans, which can be obtained from clinical maximal usage trials. FDA guidance recommends conducting in vitro skin permeation tests (IVPTs) to help select formulations for maximal usage clinical trials as IVPT results may be indicative of in vivo absorption. This case study reports in vitro methodologies used for the selection of sunscreen products for an FDA-sponsored proof-of-concept maximal usage clinical trial. An IVPT method was developed using human cadaver skin. Commercially available sunscreen products were tested to determine the skin absorption potential of common UV filters using the IVPT. All the studied sunscreen products demonstrated a certain degree of skin absorption of UV filters using IVPT, and a formulation rank order was obtained. These sunscreen products were also characterized for several formulation properties including the globule size in emulsions, which was found to be an indicator for the rank order.

Customized Prevention Trials Could Resolve the Controversy of the Effects of Omega-3 Fatty Acids on Cancer.

Literature data revealed that the benefits of consuming omega-3 fatty acid (n-3FA) supplements such as fish oil with the goal of reducing the incidence of chronic diseases such as cardiovascular disease and cancer remain controversial. The purpose of this commentary is to discuss factors that may account for the inconsistency of results across different studies. Critical review of the published data, including our own preclinical and clinical studies, strongly suggests that customized clinical prevention trials are needed to resolve the above-mentioned controversy. Specifically, in order to develop a personalized cancer prevention strategy, more attention should be given to multiple factors including the dose of the n-3FA, the specific placebo used as a comparator, duration of administration, type of intervention (primary vs secondary prevention trial), specific compound (DHA vs EPA vs their metabolites), the ratio of n-3FA:n-6FA and the target population tested (high vs average risk).

Quantitative Imaging Assessment for Clinical Trials in Oncology.

BACKGROUND: Objective radiographic assessment is crucial for accurately evaluating therapeutic efficacy and patient outcomes in oncology clinical trials. Imaging assessment workflow can be complex; can vary with institution; may burden medical oncologists, who are often inadequately trained in radiology and response criteria; and can lead to high interobserver variability and investigator bias. This article reviews the development of a tumor response assessment core (TRAC) at a comprehensive cancer center with the goal of providing standardized, objective, unbiased tumor imaging assessments, and highlights the web-based platform and overall workflow. In addition, quantitative response assessments by the medical oncologists, radiologist, and TRAC are compared in a retrospective cohort of patients to determine concordance. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The TRAC workflow includes an image analyst who pre-reviews scans before review with a board-certified radiologist and then manually uploads annotated data on the proprietary TRAC web portal. Patients previously enrolled in 10 lung cancer clinical trials between January 2005 and December 2015 were identified, and the prospectively collected quantitative response assessments by the medical oncologists were compared with retrospective analysis of the same dataset by a radiologist and TRAC. RESULTS: This study enlisted 49 consecutive patients (53% female) with a median age of 60 years (range, 29-78 years); 2 patients did not meet study criteria and were excluded. A linearly weighted kappa test for concordance for TRAC versus radiologist was substantial at 0.65 (95% CI, 0.46-0.85; standard error [SE], 0.10). The kappa value was moderate at 0.42 (95% CI, 0.20-0.64; SE, 0.11) for TRAC versus oncologists and only fair at 0.34 (95% CI, 0.12-0.55; SE, 0.11) for oncologists versus radiologist. CONCLUSIONS: Medical oncologists burdened with the task of tumor measurements in patients on clinical trials may introduce significant variability and investigator bias, with the potential to affect therapeutic response and clinical trial outcomes. Institutional imaging cores may help bridge the gap by providing unbiased and reproducible measurements and enable a leaner workflow.

Development of a core outcome set for myocardial infarction in clinical trials of traditional Chinese medicine: a study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Myocardial infarction (MI) is the most dangerous complication in patients with coronary heart disease. In China, there is an increasing number of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) for treating MI. However, the inconsistency of outcome reporting means that a large number of clinical trials cannot be included in systematic reviews to provide the best evidence for clinical practice. The aim of this study is to develop a core outcome set (COS) for future TCM clinical trials of MI, which may improve the consistency of outcome reporting and facilitate the synthesis of data across studies in systematic reviews. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will conduct a systematic review of MI clinical trials with any intervention. Semistructured interviews will be conducted to obtain the perspectives of patients with MI. The outcomes from the systematic review and semistructured interviews will be grouped and used to develop a questionnaire. The questionnaire will be developed as a supplement for the TCM syndromes of MI and will be constructed from the results of a systematic review, existing medical records and a cross-sectional study. Then two rounds of the Delphi survey will be conducted with different stakeholders (TCM experts and Western medicine experts in cardiovascular disease, methodologists, magazine editors and patients) to determine the importance of the outcomes. Only the TCM experts will need to response to the questionnaire for core TCM syndromes. A face-to-face consensus meeting will be conducted to create a final COS and recommend measurement time for each outcome. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This project has been approved by the Ethics Committee of Dongzhimen Hospital, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine. The final COS will be published and freely available. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: This study is registered with the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials database as study 1243 (available at: http://www.comet-initiative.org/studies/details/1243).