Remote Monitoring in Clinical Trials During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has rapidly challenged the pharmaceutical industry to implement remote clinical trials. The industry's lack of extensive experience with remote measurements initiates multiple questions about how to select candidates for remote collection, their validity, and regulatory implications of moving certain assessments to a remote mode. We propose a decision tree for migration of clinic to remote assessments and highlight activities required to ensure that these measurements are valid, safe, and usable.

"In-House" Data on the Outside-A Mobile Health Approach.

Mobile health (mHealth) technologies have the potential to capture dense patient data on the background of real-life behavior. Merck & Co., Inc. (Kenilworth, NJ), in collaboration with Koneksa Health, conducted a phase I clinical trial to validate cardiovascular mHealth technologies for concordance with traditional approaches and to establish sensitivity to detect effects of pharmacological intervention. This two-part study enrolled 18 healthy male subjects. Part I, a 5-day study, compared mHealth measures of heart rate (HR) and blood pressure (BP) to those from traditional methods. Hypotheses of similarity, in the clinic and at home, were tested individually for HR, systolic BP, and diastolic BP, at a 2-sided 0.05 alpha level, with a prespecified criterion for similarity being the percentage differences between the 2 measurements within 15%. Part II, a 7-day, 3-period randomized balanced crossover study, evaluated the mHealth technology's ability to detect effects of bisoprolol and salbutamol. Hypotheses that the changes from baseline in HR were greater in the bisoprolol (reduction in HR) and salbutamol (increase in HR) groups compared with no treatment were tested, at a 1-sided 0.05 alpha level. Linear mixed-effects models, Pearson's correlation coefficients, summary statistics, and exploratory plots were applied to analyze the data. The mHealth measures of HR and BP were demonstrated to be similar to those from traditional methods, and sensitive to changes in cardiovascular parameters induced by bisoprolol and salbutamol.

Continuous Monitoring Using a Wearable Device Detects Activity-Induced Heart Rate Changes After Administration of Amphetamine.

Wearable digital devices offer potential advantages over traditional methods for the collection of health-related information, including continuous collection of dense data while study subjects are ambulatory or in remote settings. We assessed the utility of collecting continuous actigraphy and cardiac monitoring by deploying two US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 510(k)-cleared devices in a phase I clinical trial of a novel compound, which included the use of an amphetamine challenge. The Phillips Actiwatch Spectrum Pro (Actiwatch) was used to assess mobility and sleep. The Preventice BodyGuardian (BodyGuardian) was used for monitoring heart rate (HR) and respiratory rate (RR), via single-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) recordings, together with physical activity. We measured data collection rates, compared device readouts with conventional measures, and monitored changes in HR measures during the amphetamine challenge. Completeness of data collection was good for the Actiwatch (96%) and lower for the BodyGuardian (80%). A good correlation was observed between device and in-clinic measures for HR (r = 0.99; P < 0.001), but was poor for RR (r = 0.39; P = 0.004). Manual reviews of selected ECG strips corresponding to HR measures below, within, and above the normal range were consistent with BodyGuardian measurements. The BodyGuardian device detected clear HR responses after amphetamine administration while subjects were physically active, whereas conventional measures collected at predefined timepoints while subjects were resting and supine did not. Wearable digital technology shows promise for monitoring human subjects for physiologic changes and pharmacologic responses, although fit-for-purpose evaluation and validation continues to be important prior to the wider deployment of these devices.

Evaluation of Wearable Digital Devices in a Phase I Clinical Trial.

We assessed the performance of two US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 510(k)-cleared wearable digital devices and the operational feasibility of deploying them to augment data collection in a 10-day residential phase I clinical trial. The Phillips Actiwatch Spectrum Pro (Actiwatch) was used to assess mobility and sleep, and the Vitalconnect HealthPatch MD (HealthPatch) was used for monitoring heart rate (HR), respiratory rate (RR), and surface skin temperature (ST). We measured data collection rates, compared device readouts with anticipated readings and conventional in-clinic measures, investigated data limitations, and assessed user acceptability. Six of nine study participants consented; completeness of data collection was adequate (> 90% for four of six subjects). A good correlation was observed between the HealthPatch device derived and in-clinic measures for HR (Pearson r = 0.71; P = 2.2e-16) but this was poor for RR (r = 0.08; P = 0.44) and ST (r = 0.14; P = 0.14). Manual review of electrocardiogram strips recorded during reported episodes of tachycardia > 180 beats/min showed that these were artefacts. The HealthPatch was judged to be not fit-for-purpose because of artefacts and the need for time-consuming manual review. The Actiwatch device was suitable for monitoring mobility, collecting derived sleep data, and facilitating the interpretation of vital sign data. These results suggest the need for fit-for-purpose evaluation of wearable devices prior to their deployment in drug development studies.