Determining the Suitability of Registries for Embedding Clinical Trials in the United States: A Project of the Clinical Trials Transformation Initiative.

BACKGROUND: Patient registries are organized systems that use observational methods to collect uniform data on specified outcomes in a population defined by a particular disease, condition, or exposure. Data collected in registries often coincide with data that could support clinical trials. Integrating clinical trials within registries to create registry-embedded clinical trials offers opportunities to reduce duplicative data collection, identify and recruit patients more efficiently, decrease time to database lock, accelerate time to regulatory decision-making, and reduce clinical trial costs. This article describes a project of the Clinical Trials Transformation Initiative (CTTI) intended to help clinical trials researchers determine when a registry could potentially serve as the platform for the conduct of a clinical trial. METHODS: Through a review of registry-embedded clinical trials and commentaries, semi-structured interviews with experts, and a multi-stakeholder expert meeting, the project team addressed how to identify and describe essential registry characteristics, practices, and processes required to for conducting embedded clinical trials intended for regulatory submissions in the United States. RESULTS: Recommendations, suggested practices, and decision trees that facilitate the assessment of whether a registry is suitable for embedding clinical trials were developed, as well as considerations for the design of new registries. Essential registry characteristics include relevancy, robustness, reliability, and assurance of patient protections. CONCLUSIONS: The project identifies a clear role for registries in creating a sustainable and reusable infrastructure to conduct clinical trials. Adoption of these recommendations will facilitate the ability to perform high-quality and efficient prospective registry-based clinical trials.

EFFICACY AND SAFETY OF A NEW TOPICAL TESTOSTERONE REPLACEMENT GEL THERAPY FOR THE TREATMENT OF MALE HYPOGONADISM.

OBJECTIVE: Testosterone replacement therapy is indicated for male hypogonadism. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of testosterone gel 2% (Tgel) over 90 days. METHODS: This phase 3, open-label, noncomparator study was conducted in adult hypogonadal men (2 consecutive fasting serum testosterone values <300 ng/dL and >86% subjects with symptoms consistent with testosterone deficiency). Subjects applied Tgel 23 mg/day (single pump-actuation using a hands-free cap applicator). The dose was uptitrated to 46 mg/day after 2 weeks if the 4-hour serum total testosterone level was <500 ng/dL. The dose could be further up- or downtitrated to 23, 46, and 69 mg on Days 21, 42, and 63. The primary endpoint included the percentage of subjects with average testosterone concentration (Cave (0-24)) between 300 and 1,050 ng/dL on Day 90. Safety endpoints were adverse events (AEs), laboratory parameters, and vital signs. RESULTS: Of the 159 who enrolled, 139 men completed the study. Approximately three-quarters (76.1%) of subjects met Cave criteria on Day 90. Most AEs were mild to moderate. There were 5 serious AEs, and 1 (myocardial infarction) was judged as possibly related to Tgel. Confirmed excessive increases in prostate-specific antigen or hematocrit levels were rare. Tgel had a favorable local skin tolerability profile. CONCLUSION: Overall, 76% of subjects achieved Cave between 300 and 1,050 ng/dL with Tgel. Symptoms of testosterone deficiency improved with few safety concerns. ABBREVIATIONS: AE = adverse event Cave(0-24) = average testosterone concentration CI = confidence interval Cmax = maximum concentration IIEF = International Index of Erectile Function MAF = Multidimensional Assessment of Fatigue PK = pharmacokinetic PSA = prostate-specific antigen SAE = serious adverse event SF-12 = Short Form 12 Health Survey Tgel = testosterone gel 2% Tmax = time to achieve maximum concentration TRT = testosterone replacement therapy.

Association Between Use of a Scalp Cooling Device and Alopecia After Chemotherapy for Breast Cancer.

Importance: Chemotherapy-induced alopecia is a common and distressing adverse effect. In previous studies of scalp cooling to prevent chemotherapy-induced alopecia, conclusions have been limited. Objectives: To evaluate whether use of a scalp cooling system is associated with a lower amount of hair loss among women receiving specific chemotherapy regimens for early-stage breast cancer and to assess related changes in quality of life. Design, Setting, and Participants: A prospective cohort study conducted at 5 US medical centers of women with stage I or II breast cancer receiving adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimens excluding sequential or combination anthracycline and taxane (106 patients in the scalp cooling group and 16 in the control group; 14 matched by both age and chemotherapy regimen). The study was conducted between August 2013 and October 2014 with ongoing annual follow-up for 5 years. Exposures: Use of a scalp cooling system. Scalp cooling was initiated 30 minutes prior to each chemotherapy cycle, with scalp temperature maintained at 3°C (37°F) throughout chemotherapy and for 90 minutes to 120 minutes afterward. Main Outcomes and Measures: Self-estimated hair loss using the Dean scale was assessed 4 weeks after the last dose of chemotherapy by unblinded patient review of 5 photographs. A Dean scale score of 0 to 2 (≤50% hair loss) was defined as treatment success. A positive association between scalp cooling and reduced risk of hair loss would be demonstrated if 50% or more of patients in the scalp cooling group achieved treatment success, with the lower bound of the 95% CI greater than 40% of the success proportion. Quality of life was assessed at baseline, at the start of the last chemotherapy cycle, and 1 month later. Median follow-up was 29.5 months. Results: Among the 122 patients in the study, the mean age was 53 years (range, 28-77 years); 77.0% were white, 9.0% were black, and 10.7% were Asian; and the mean duration of chemotherapy was 2.3 months (median, 2.1 months). No participants in the scalp cooling group received anthracyclines. Hair loss of 50% or less (Dean score of 0-2) was seen in 67 of 101 patients (66.3%; 95% CI, 56.2%-75.4%) evaluable for alopecia in the scalp cooling group vs 0 of 16 patients (0%) in the control group (P < .001). Three of 5 quality-of-life measures were significantly better 1 month after the end of chemotherapy in the scalp cooling group. Of patients who underwent scalp cooling, 27.3% (95% CI, 18.0%-36.6%) reported feeling less physically attractive compared with 56.3% (95% CI, 31.9%-80.6%) of patients in the control group (P = .02). Of the 106 patients in the scalp cooling group, 4 (3.8%) experienced the adverse event of mild headache and 3 (2.8%) discontinued scalp cooling due to feeling cold. Conclusions and Relevance: Among women undergoing non-anthracycline-based adjuvant chemotherapy for early-stage breast cancer, the use of scalp cooling vs no scalp cooling was associated with less hair loss at 4 weeks after the last dose of chemotherapy. Further research is needed to assess outcomes after patients receive anthracycline regimens, longer-term measures of alopecia, and adverse effects. Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01831024.

Working with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to obtain approval of products under the Animal Rule.

While the development of medical products and approval by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is well known, the development of countermeasures against exposure to toxic levels of radiation, chemicals, and infectious agents requires special consideration, and there has been, to date, little experience in working with the FDA to obtain approval of these products. The FDA has published a regulation entitled "Approval of Biological Products when Human Efficacy Studies are not Ethical or Feasible." This regulation, known simply as the "Animal Rule," was designed to permit approval or licensing of drugs and biologics when efficacy studies in humans are not ethical or feasible. To date, 12 products have been approved under the Animal Rule. It is highly recommended that sponsors of products that are to be developed under the Animal Rule meet with the FDA and other government entities early in the development process to ensure that the efficacy and safety studies that are planned will meet the FDA's requirements for approval of the product.

Extended Risk-Based Monitoring Model, On-Demand Query-Driven Source Data Verification, and Their Economic Impact on Clinical Trial Operations.

BACKGROUND: Computer-aided data validation enhanced by centralized monitoring algorithms is a more powerful tool for data cleaning compared to manual source document verification (SDV). This fact led to the growing popularity of risk-based monitoring (RBM) coupled with reduced SDV and centralized statistical surveillance. Since RBM models are new and immature, there is a lack of consensus on practical implementation. Existing RBM models' weaknesses include (1) mixing data monitoring and site process monitoring (ie, micro vs macro level), making it more complex, obscure, and less practical; and (2) artificial separation of RBM from data cleaning leading to resource overutilization. The authors view SDV as an essential part (and extension) of the data-validation process. METHODS: This report offers an efficient and scientifically grounded model for SDV. The innovative component of this model is in making SDV ultimately a part of the query management process. Cost savings from reduced SDV are estimated using a proprietary budget simulation tool with percent cost reductions presented for four study sizes in four therapeutic areas. RESULTS: It has been shown that an "on-demand" (query-driven) SDV model implemented in clinical trial monitoring could result in cost savings from 3% to 14% for smaller studies to 25% to 35% or more for large studies. CONCLUSIONS: (1) High-risk sites (identified via analytics) do not necessarily require a higher percent SDV. While high-risk sites require additional resources to assess and mitigate risks, in many cases these resources are likely to be allocated to non-SDV activities such as GCP, training, etc. (2) It is not necessary to combine SDV with the GCP compliance monitoring. Data validation and query management must be at the heart of SDV as it makes the RBM system more effective and efficient. Thus, focusing SDV effort on queries is a promising strategy. (3) Study size effect must be considered in designing the monitoring plan since the law of diminishing returns dictates focusing SDV on "high-value" data points. Relatively lower impact of individual errors on the study results leads to realization that larger studies require less data cleaning, and most data (including most critical data points) do not require SDV. Subsequently, the most significant economy is expected in larger studies.

Risk-Based Monitoring: A Closer Statistical Look at Source Document Verification, Queries, Study Size Effects, and Data Quality.

BACKGROUND: Data quality within the clinical research enterprise can be defined as the absence of errors that matter and whether the data are fit for purpose. This concept, proposed by the Clinical Trials Transformation Initiative, resulted from a culmination of collaboration with industry, academia, patient advocates, and regulators, and it emphasizes the presence of a hierarchy of error types, resulting in a more efficient and modern data-cleaning paradigm. While source document verification (SDV) is commonly used as a quality control method in clinical research, it is disproportionately expensive and often leads to questionable benefits. Although the current literature suggests that there is a need to reduce the burden of SDV, there is no consensus on how to replace this "tried and true" practice. METHODS: This article proposes a practical risk-based monitoring approach based on published statistical evidence addressing the impact of database changes subsequent to SDV. RESULTS: The analysis clearly demonstrates minimal effects of errors and error corrections on study results and study conclusions, with diminishing effect as the study size increases, and it suggests that, on average, <8% SDV is adequate to ensure data quality, with perhaps higher SDV rates for smaller studies and virtually 0% SDV for large studies. CONCLUSIONS: It is recommended that SDV, rather than just focusing on key primary efficacy and safety outcomes, focus on data clarification queries as highly discrepant (and the riskiest) data.

Monitoring the quality of conduct of clinical trials: a survey of current practices.

BACKGROUND: There is a little empirical evidence to determine which, if any, monitoring practices best achieve the goals of trial monitoring set forth in ICH E6 under the variable circumstances of different clinical trial settings. PURPOSE: The purpose of this project was to describe current methods of monitoring clinical trials and to explore the rationale for the use of those methods. METHODS: An electronic survey of known monitoring practices was developed and sent to over 200 organizations involved in conducting clinical research. The survey collected information on institutional demographics, methods of overall study oversight, use of risk-based monitoring and factors that influence assessments of risk, and details on quality assurance and monitoring practices. RESULTS: Seventy-nine organizations completed the survey; our analysis included the 65 organizations that indicated they perform clinical trials. Data from the survey indicate that a wide variety of monitoring practices are currently being employed. Eighty-three percent of respondents use centrally available data to evaluate site performance, but only 12% of respondents always or frequently used centralized monitoring to replace on-site visits. Eighty-seven percent of respondents indicated that they always performed on-site visits. This varied by type of organization, with 31% of academic coordinating centers/cooperative groups/government organizations always performing on-site monitoring visits versus 84% of other organizations. The rationale for using a specific monitoring approach does not appear to be based on empirical evidence. Fifty-four percent of respondents stated that 'usual practice' determined the frequency with which they conducted on-site monitoring visits. LIMITATIONS: The overall response rate to our survey was only 30%; thus, we may not have captured the full variance of current monitoring practices, and our responding sample may not be representative. CONCLUSION: These findings underscore the necessity of research to provide an evidence base for monitoring practice.

Evaluation of Data Entry Errors and Data Changes to an Electronic Data Capture Clinical Trial Database.

Monitoring of clinical trials includes several disciplines, stakeholders, and skill sets. The aim of the present study was to identify database changes and data entry errors to an electronic data capture (EDC) clinical trial database, and to access the impact of the changes. To accomblish the aim, Target e*CRF was used as the EDC tool for a multinational, dose-finding, multicenter, double-blind, randomized, parallel, placebo-controlled trial to investigate efficacy and safety of a new treatment in men with lower urinary tract symptoms associated with benign prostatic hyperplasia. The main errors observed were simple transcription errors from the paper source documents to the EDC database. This observation was to be expected, since every transaction has an inherant error rate. What and how to monitor must be assessed within the risk-based monitoring section of the comprehensive data monitoring plan. With the advent of direct data entry, and the elimination of the requirement to transcribe from a paper source record to an EDC system, error rates should go down dramatically. In addition, protocol violations and data outside the normal range can be identified at the time of data entry and not days, weeks, and months after the fact.