Identifications of Similarity Metrics for Patients With Cancer: Protocol for a Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: Understanding the similarities of patients with cancer is essential to advancing personalized medicine, improving patient outcomes, and developing more effective and individualized treatments. It enables researchers to discover important patterns, biomarkers, and treatment strategies that can have a significant impact on cancer research and oncology. In addition, the identification of previously successfully treated patients supports oncologists in making treatment decisions for a new patient who is clinically or molecularly similar to the previous patient. OBJECTIVE: The planned review aims to systematically summarize, map, and describe existing evidence to understand how patient similarity is defined and used in cancer research and clinical care. METHODS: To systematically identify relevant studies and to ensure reproducibility and transparency of the review process, a comprehensive literature search will be conducted in several bibliographic databases, including Web of Science, PubMed, LIVIVIVO, and MEDLINE, covering the period from 1998 to February 2024. After the initial duplicate deletion phase, a study selection phase will be applied using Rayyan, which consists of 3 distinct steps: title and abstract screening, disagreement resolution, and full-text screening. To ensure the integrity and quality of the selection process, each of these steps is preceded by a pilot testing phase. This methodological process will culminate in the presentation of the final research results in a structured form according to the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) flowchart. The protocol has been registered in the Journal of Medical Internet Research. RESULTS: This protocol outlines the methodologies used in conducting the scoping review. A search of the specified electronic databases and after removing duplicates resulted in 1183 unique records. As of March 2024, the review process has moved to the full-text evaluation phase. At this stage, data extraction will be conducted using a pretested chart template. CONCLUSIONS: The scoping review protocol, centered on these main concepts, aims to systematically map the available evidence on patient similarity among patients with cancer. By defining the types of data sources, approaches, and methods used in the field, and aligning these with the research questions, the review will provide a foundation for future research and clinical application in personalized cancer care. This protocol will guide the literature search, data extraction, and synthesis of findings to achieve the review's objectives. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/58705.

Classifiers of Data Sharing Statements in Clinical Trial Records.

Digital individual participant data (IPD) from clinical trials are increasingly distributed for potential scientific reuse. The identification of available IPD, however, requires interpretations of textual data-sharing statements (DSS) in large databases. Recent advancements in computational linguistics include pre-trained language models that promise to simplify the implementation of effective classifiers based on textual inputs. In a subset of 5,000 textual DSS from ClinicalTrials.gov, we evaluate how well classifiers based on domain-specific pre-trained language models reproduce original availability categories as well as manually annotated labels. Typical metrics indicate that classifiers that predicted manual annotations outperformed those that learned to output the original availability categories. This suggests that the textual DSS descriptions contain applicable information that the availability categories do not, and that such classifiers could thus aid the automatic identification of available IPD in large trial databases.

recruIT: A cloud-native clinical trial recruitment support system based on Health Level 7 Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (HL7 FHIR) and the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership Common Data Model (OMOP CDM).

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials (CTs) are foundational to the advancement of evidence-based medicine and recruiting a sufficient number of participants is one of the crucial steps to their successful conduct. Yet, poor recruitment remains the most frequent reason for premature discontinuation or costly extension of clinical trials. METHODS: We designed and implemented a novel, open-source software system to support the recruitment process in clinical trials by generating automatic recruitment recommendations. The development is guided by modern, cloud-native design principles and based on Health Level 7 (HL7) Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (FHIR) as an interoperability standard with the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership (OMOP) Common Data Model (CDM) being used as a source of patient data. We evaluated the usability using the system usability scale (SUS) after deploying the application for use by study personnel. RESULTS: The implementation is based on the OMOP CDM as a repository of patient data that is continuously queried for possible trial candidates based on given clinical trial eligibility criteria. A web-based screening list can be used to display the candidates and email notifications about possible new trial participants can be sent automatically. All interactions between services use HL7 FHIR as the communication standard. The system can be installed using standard container technology and supports more sophisticated deployments on Kubernetes clusters. End-users (n = 19) rated the system with a SUS score of 79.9/100. CONCLUSION: We contribute a novel, open-source implementation to support the patient recruitment process in clinical trials that can be deployed using state-of-the art technologies. According to the SUS score, the system provides good usability.

Data Visualization Support for Tumor Boards and Clinical Oncology: Protocol for a Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: Complex and expanding data sets in clinical oncology applications require flexible and interactive visualization of patient data to provide the maximum amount of information to physicians and other medical practitioners. Interdisciplinary tumor conferences in particular profit from customized tools to integrate, link, and visualize relevant data from all professions involved. OBJECTIVE: The scoping review proposed in this protocol aims to identify and present currently available data visualization tools for tumor boards and related areas. The objective of the review will be to provide not only an overview of digital tools currently used in tumor board settings, but also the data included, the respective visualization solutions, and their integration into hospital processes. METHODS: The planned scoping review process is based on the Arksey and O'Malley scoping study framework. The following electronic databases will be searched for articles published in English: PubMed, Web of Knowledge, and SCOPUS. Eligible articles will first undergo a deduplication step, followed by the screening of titles and abstracts. Second, a full-text screening will be used to reach the final decision about article selection. At least 2 reviewers will independently screen titles, abstracts, and full-text reports. Conflicting inclusion decisions will be resolved by a third reviewer. The remaining literature will be analyzed using a data extraction template proposed in this protocol. The template includes a variety of meta information as well as specific questions aiming to answer the research question: "What are the key features of data visualization solutions used in molecular and organ tumor boards, and how are these elements integrated and used within the clinical setting?" The findings will be compiled, charted, and presented as specified in the scoping study framework. Data for included tools may be supplemented with additional manual literature searches. The entire review process will be documented in alignment with the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) flowchart. RESULTS: The results of this scoping review will be reported per the expanded PRISMA-ScR guidelines. A preliminary search using PubMed, Web of Knowledge, and Scopus resulted in 1320 articles after deduplication that will be included in the further review process. We expect the results to be published during the second quarter of 2024. CONCLUSIONS: Visualization is a key process in leveraging a data set's potentially available information and enabling its use in an interdisciplinary setting. The scoping review described in this protocol aims to present the status quo of visualization solutions for tumor board and clinical oncology applications and their integration into hospital processes. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/53627.

Evaluation of Eligibility Criteria Relevance for the Purpose of IT-Supported Trial Recruitment: Descriptive Quantitative Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials (CTs) are crucial for medical research; however, they frequently fall short of the requisite number of participants who meet all eligibility criteria (EC). A clinical trial recruitment support system (CTRSS) is developed to help identify potential participants by performing a search on a specific data pool. The accuracy of the search results is directly related to the quality of the data used for comparison. Data accessibility can present challenges, making it crucial to identify the necessary data for a CTRSS to query. Prior research has examined the data elements frequently used in CT EC but has not evaluated which criteria are actually used to search for participants. Although all EC must be met to enroll a person in a CT, not all criteria have the same importance when searching for potential participants in an existing data pool, such as an electronic health record, because some of the criteria are only relevant at the time of enrollment. OBJECTIVE: In this study, we investigated which groups of data elements are relevant in practice for finding suitable participants and whether there are typical elements that are not relevant and can therefore be omitted. METHODS: We asked trial experts and CTRSS developers to first categorize the EC of their CTs according to data element groups and then to classify them into 1 of 3 categories: necessary, complementary, and irrelevant. In addition, the experts assessed whether a criterion was documented (on paper or digitally) or whether it was information known only to the treating physicians or patients. RESULTS: We reviewed 82 CTs with 1132 unique EC. Of these 1132 EC, 350 (30.9%) were considered necessary, 224 (19.8%) complementary, and 341 (30.1%) total irrelevant. To identify the most relevant data elements, we introduced the data element relevance index (DERI). This describes the percentage of studies in which the corresponding data element occurs and is also classified as necessary or supplementary. We found that the query of "diagnosis" was relevant for finding participants in 79 (96.3%) of the CTs. This group was followed by "date of birth/age" with a DERI of 85.4% (n=70) and "procedure" with a DERI of 35.4% (n=29). CONCLUSIONS: The distribution of data element groups in CTs has been heterogeneously described in previous works. Therefore, we recommend identifying the percentage of CTs in which data element groups can be found as a more reliable way to determine the relevance of EC. Only necessary and complementary criteria should be included in this DERI.