Current state-of-the-art and gaps in platform trials: 10 things you should know, insights from EU-PEARL.

Platform trials bring the promise of making clinical research more efficient and more patient centric. While their use has become more widespread, including their prominent role during the COVID-19 pandemic response, broader adoption of platform trials has been limited by the lack of experience and tools to navigate the critical upfront planning required to launch such collaborative studies. The European Union-Patient-cEntric clinicAl tRial pLatform (EU-PEARL) initiative has produced new methodologies to expand the use of platform trials with an overarching infrastructure and services embedded into Integrated Research Platforms (IRPs), in collaboration with patient representatives and through consultation with U.S. Food and Drug Administration and European Medicines Agency stakeholders. In this narrative review, we discuss the outlook for platform trials in Europe, including challenges related to infrastructure, design, adaptations, data sharing and regulation. Documents derived from the EU-PEARL project, alongside a literature search including PubMed and relevant grey literature (e.g., guidance from regulatory agencies and health technology agencies) were used as sources for a multi-stage collaborative process through which the 10 more important points based on lessons drawn from the EU-PEARL project were developed and summarised as guidance for the setup of platform trials. We conclude that early involvement of critical stakeholder such as regulatory agencies or patients are critical steps in the implementation and later acceptance of platform trials. Addressing these gaps will be critical for attaining the full potential of platform trials for patients. Funding: Innovative Medicines Initiative 2 Joint Undertaking with support from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme and EFPIA.

Electronic health records (EHRs) in clinical research and platform trials: Application of the innovative EHR-based methods developed by EU-PEARL.

OBJECTIVE: Electronic Health Record (EHR) systems are digital platforms in clinical practice used to collect patients' clinical information related to their health status and represents a useful storage of real-world data. EHRs have a potential role in research studies, in particular, in platform trials. Platform trials are innovative trial designs including multiple trial arms (conducted simultaneously and/or sequentially) on different treatments under a single master protocol. However, the use of EHRs in research comes with important challenges such as incompleteness of records and the need to translate trial eligibility criteria into interoperable queries. In this paper, we aim to review and to describe our proposed innovative methods to tackle some of the most important challenges identified. This work is part of the Innovative Medicines Initiative (IMI) EU Patient-cEntric clinicAl tRial pLatforms (EU-PEARL) project's work package 3 (WP3), whose objective is to deliver tools and guidance for EHR-based protocol feasibility assessment, clinical site selection, and patient pre-screening in platform trials, investing in the building of a data-driven clinical network framework that can execute these complex innovative designs for which feasibility assessments are critically important. METHODS: ISO standards and relevant references informed a readiness survey, producing 354 criteria with corresponding questions selected and harmonised through a 7-round scoring process (0-1) in stakeholder meetings, with 85% of consensus being the threshold of acceptance for a criterium/question. ATLAS cohort definition and Cohort Diagnostics were mainly used to create the trial feasibility eligibility (I/E) criteria as executable interoperable queries. RESULTS: The WP3/EU-PEARL group developed a readiness survey (eSurvey) for an efficient selection of clinical sites with suitable EHRs, consisting of yes-or-no questions, and a set-up of interoperable proxy queries using physicians' defined trial criteria. Both actions facilitate recruiting trial participants and alignment between study costs/timelines and data-driven recruitment potential. CONCLUSION: The eSurvey will help create an archive of clinical sites with mature EHR systems suitable to participate in clinical trials/platform trials, and the interoperable proxy queries of trial eligibility criteria will help identify the number of potential participants. Ultimately, these tools will contribute to the production of EHR-based protocol design.

Morphofunctional Changes After Sleeve Gastrectomy and Very Low Calorie Diet in an Animal Model of Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease.

BACKGROUND: Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is the most prevalent chronic liver disease and is found in 70% of obese people. The evidence available to date suggests that bariatric surgery could be an effective treatment by reducing weight and also by improving metabolic complications in the long term. This work aimed to compare, in a diet-induced NAFLD animal model, the effect of both sleeve gastrectomy (SG) and very-low calorie diet (VLCD). METHODS: Thirty-five Wistar rats were divided into control rats (n = 7) and obese rats fed a high-fat diet (HFD). After 10 weeks, the obese rats were subdivided into four groups: HFD (n = 7), VLCD (n = 7), and rats submitted to either a sham operation (n = 7) or SG (n = 7). Both liver tissue and blood samples were processed to evaluate steatosis and NASH changes in histology (Oil Red, Sirius Red and H&E); presence of endothelial damage (CD31, Moesin/p-Moesin, Akt/p-Akt, eNOS/p-eNOS), oxidative stress (iNOS) and fibrosis (αSMA, Col1, PDGF, VEGF) proteins in liver tissue; and inflammatory (IL6, IL10, MCP-1, IL17α, TNFα), liver biochemical function, and hormonal (leptin, ghrelin, visfatin and insulin) alterations in plasma. RESULTS: Both VLCD and SG improved histology, but only SG induced a significant weight loss, improved endothelial damage, and a decreased cardiovascular risk by reducing insulin resistance (IR), leptin, total cholesterol, and triglyceride levels. There were no relevant variations in the inflammatory and fibrosis markers. CONCLUSION: Our study suggests a slight superiority of SG over VLCD by improving not only the histology but also the IR and cardiovascular risk markers related to NAFLD.