The overlap between randomised evaluations of recruitment and retention interventions: An updated review of recruitment (Online Resource for Recruitment in Clinical triAls) and retention (Online Resource for Retention in Clinical triAls) literature.

BACKGROUND: The Online Resource for Recruitment in Clinical triAls (ORRCA) and the Online Resource for Retention in Clinical triAls (ORRCA2) were established to organise and map the literature addressing participant recruitment and retention within clinical research. The two databases are updated on an ongoing basis using separate but parallel systematic reviews. However, recruitment and retention of research participants is widely acknowledged to be interconnected. While interventions aimed at addressing recruitment challenges can impact retention and vice versa, it is not clear how well they are simultaneously considered within methodological research. This study aims to report the recent update of ORRCA and ORRCA2 with a special emphasis on assessing crossover of the databases and how frequently randomised studies of methodological interventions measure the impact on both recruitment and retention outcomes. METHODS: Two parallel systematic reviews were conducted in line with previously reported methods updating ORRCA (recruitment) and ORRCA2 (retention) with publications from 2018 and 2019. Articles were categorised according to their evidence type (randomised evaluation, non-randomised evaluation, application and observation) and against the recruitment and retention domain frameworks. Articles categorised as randomised evaluations were compared to identify studies appearing in both databases. For randomised studies that were only in one database, domain categories were used to assess whether the methodological intervention was likely to impact on the alternate construct. For example, whether a recruitment intervention might also impact retention. RESULTS: In total, 806 of 17,767 articles screened for the recruitment database and 175 of 18,656 articles screened for the retention database were added as result of the update. Of these, 89 articles were classified as 'randomised evaluation', of which 6 were systematic reviews and 83 were randomised evaluations of methodological interventions. Ten of the randomised studies assessed recruitment and retention and were included in both databases. Of the randomised studies only in the recruitment database, 48/55 (87%) assessed the content or format of participant information which could have an impact on retention. Of the randomised studies only in the retention database, 6/18 (33%) assessed monetary incentives, 4/18 (22%) assessed data collection location and methods and 3/18 (17%) assessed non-monetary incentives, all of which could have an impact on recruitment. CONCLUSION: Only a small proportion of randomised studies of methodological interventions assessed the impact on both recruitment and retention despite having a potential impact on both outcomes. Where possible, an integrated approach analysing both constructs should be the new standard for these types of evaluations to ensure that improvements to recruitment are not at the expense of retention and vice versa.

A biomarker-stratified comparison of top-down versus accelerated step-up treatment strategies for patients with newly diagnosed Crohn's disease (PROFILE): a multicentre, open-label randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Management strategies and clinical outcomes vary substantially in patients newly diagnosed with Crohn's disease. We evaluated the use of a putative prognostic biomarker to guide therapy by assessing outcomes in patients randomised to either top-down (ie, early combined immunosuppression with infliximab and immunomodulator) or accelerated step-up (conventional) treatment strategies. METHODS: PROFILE (PRedicting Outcomes For Crohn's disease using a moLecular biomarker) was a multicentre, open-label, biomarker-stratified, randomised controlled trial that enrolled adults with newly diagnosed active Crohn's disease (Harvey-Bradshaw Index ≥7, either elevated C-reactive protein or faecal calprotectin or both, and endoscopic evidence of active inflammation). Potential participants had blood drawn to be tested for a prognostic biomarker derived from T-cell transcriptional signatures (PredictSURE-IBD assay). Following testing, patients were randomly assigned, via a secure online platform, to top-down or accelerated step-up treatment stratified by biomarker subgroup (IBDhi or IBDlo), endoscopic inflammation (mild, moderate, or severe), and extent (colonic or other). Blinding to biomarker status was maintained throughout the trial. The primary endpoint was sustained steroid-free and surgery-free remission to week 48. Remission was defined by a composite of symptoms and inflammatory markers at all visits. Flare required active symptoms (HBI ≥5) plus raised inflammatory markers (CRP >upper limit of normal or faecal calprotectin ≥200 µg/g, or both), while remission was the converse-ie, quiescent symptoms (HBI <5) or resolved inflammatory markers (both CRP ≤ the upper limit of normal and calprotectin <200 µg/g) or both. Analyses were done in the full analysis (intention-to-treat) population. The trial has completed and is registered (ISRCTN11808228). FINDINGS: Between Dec 29, 2017, and Jan 5, 2022, 386 patients (mean age 33·6 years [SD 13·2]; 179 [46%] female, 207 [54%] male) were randomised: 193 to the top-down group and 193 to the accelerated step-up group. Median time from diagnosis to trial enrolment was 12 days (range 0-191). Primary outcome data were available for 379 participants (189 in the top-down group; 190 in the accelerated step-up group). There was no biomarker-treatment interaction effect (absolute difference 1 percentage points, 95% CI -15 to 15; p=0·944). Sustained steroid-free and surgery-free remission was significantly more frequent in the top-down group than in the accelerated step-up group (149 [79%] of 189 patients vs 29 [15%] of 190 patients, absolute difference 64 percentage points, 95% CI 57 to 72; p<0·0001). There were fewer adverse events (including disease flares) and serious adverse events in the top-down group than in the accelerated step-up group (adverse events: 168 vs 315; serious adverse events: 15 vs 42), with fewer complications requiring abdominal surgery (one vs ten) and no difference in serious infections (three vs eight). INTERPRETATION: Top-down treatment with combination infliximab plus immunomodulator achieved substantially better outcomes at 1 year than accelerated step-up treatment. The biomarker did not show clinical utility. Top-down treatment should be considered standard of care for patients with newly diagnosed active Crohn's disease. FUNDING: Wellcome and PredictImmune Ltd.

Endoscopic and Histological Placebo Rates in Crohn's Disease Clinical Trials: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Precise estimates of placebo response rates help efficient clinical trial design. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we assessed contemporary placebo endoscopic and histological response rates in Crohn's disease (CD) clinical trials. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL were searched from inception to April 2022 to identify placebo-controlled studies of pharmacological interventions for CD. Endoscopic response, remission, and mucosal healing rates for participants assigned to placebo in induction and maintenance studies were pooled using a random-effects model. Point estimates and associated 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. RESULTS: In total, 16 studies (11 induction, 3 maintenance, 2 induction and maintenance) that randomized 1646 participants to placebo were eligible. For induction trials, the pooled placebo endoscopic response, endoscopic remission, and mucosal healing rates in participants assigned to placebo were 13% (95% CI, 10-16; I2 = 14.1%; P = .14), 6% (95% CI, 3-11; I2 = 74.7%; P < .001), and 6% (95% CI, 4-9; I2 = 26.9%; P = .29), respectively. The pooled endoscopic remission rate in patients who were bio-naïve was 10% (95% CI, 4-23) compared with only 4% (95% CI, 3-7) in bio-experienced patients. For maintenance trials, the pooled endoscopic response, remission, and mucosal healing rates were 7% (95% CI, 1-31; I2 = 78.2%; P = .004), 11% (95% CI, 4-27; I2 = 70.8%; P = .06), and 7% (95% CI, 3-15; I2 = 29.7; P = .23), respectively. Only 3 trials assessed histological outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic placebo rates vary according to trial phase and prior biologic exposure. These contemporary data will serve to inform CD trial design, sample size calculation, and end point selection for future trials.

Leveraging Virtual Technology to Conduct Clinical Trials in Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

Clinical trials have led to major advances in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) care over the last few decades, yet in that time most clinical trial protocols in IBD have remained markedly the same. Many IBD protocols often still require face-to-face visits and monitoring, hospital-based medication administration, paper-based forms and questionnaires, and short follow-up periods resulting in limited long-term data. These factors have recently been recognized as likely contributors to the low recruitment and lack of diversity of participants across clinical trials in IBD. However, with increasing technological advances, there is now an opportunity for improvement. This article assesses a range of virtual innovations for how they may offer digital solutions to challenges currently encountered in IBD clinical trials. Such solutions include consideration for increasing patient diversity, digital invitation, remote consent and recruitment, virtual visits, remote patient monitoring and data collection, remote medication delivery and administration, remote clinical trial monitoring, and routinely collected health data for long-term follow-up. Adoption of virtual technology may drive the field toward patient centricity and more efficient trial protocols to allow for a new era in IBD clinical trials.

DECIDE: Delphi Expert Consensus Statement on Inflammatory Bowel Disease Dysplasia Shared Management Decision-Making.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Inflammatory bowel disease colitis-associated dysplasia is managed with either enhanced surveillance and endoscopic resection or prophylactic surgery. The rate of progression to cancer after a dysplasia diagnosis remains uncertain in many cases and patients have high thresholds for accepting proctocolectomy. Individualised discussion of management options is encouraged to take place between patients and their multidisciplinary teams for best outcomes. We aimed to develop a toolkit to support a structured, multidisciplinary and shared decision-making approach to discussions about dysplasia management options between clinicians and their patients. METHODS: Evidence from systematic literature reviews, mixed-methods studies conducted with key stakeholders, and decision-making expert recommendations were consolidated to draft consensus statements by the DECIDE steering group. These were then subjected to an international, multidisciplinary modified electronic Delphi process until an a priori threshold of 80% agreement was achieved to establish consensus for each statement. RESULTS: In all, 31 members [15 gastroenterologists, 14 colorectal surgeons and two nurse specialists] from nine countries formed the Delphi panel. We present the 18 consensus statements generated after two iterative rounds of anonymous voting. CONCLUSIONS: By consolidating evidence for best practice using literature review and key stakeholder and decision-making expert consultation, we have developed international consensus recommendations to support health care professionals counselling patients on the management of high cancer risk colitis-associated dysplasia. The final toolkit includes clinician and patient decision aids to facilitate shared decision-making.

Results of the Eighth Scientific Workshop of ECCO: Diagnosing Postoperative Recurrence of Crohn's Disease After an Ileocolonic Resection With Ileocolonic Anastomosis.

Despite the introduction of potent biologic therapies, many patients with Crohn's disease [CD] still require an ileocolonic resection [ICR] during the course of their disease. Furthermore, the need of redo ICR has not decreased over the past few decades, highlighting the need for better strategies to prevent and treat postoperative recurrence [POR]. The first step to develop such a strategy would be to define and standardise the description of POR with adequate diagnostic instruments. In this article, we will describe the different methodologies used to report POR [endoscopic, histological, radiological, biochemical, clinical, and surgical], and review their potential benefits and limitations, as well as the optimal timing of evaluation.

Complex and alternate consent pathways in clinical trials: methodological and ethical challenges encountered by underserved groups and a call to action.

BACKGROUND: Informed consent is considered a fundamental requirement for participation in trials, yet obtaining consent is challenging in a number of populations and settings. This may be due to participants having communication or other disabilities, their capacity to consent fluctuates or they lack capacity, or in emergency situations where their medical condition or the urgent nature of the treatment precludes seeking consent from either the participant or a representative. These challenges, and the subsequent complexity of designing and conducting trials where alternative consent pathways are required, contribute to these populations being underserved in research. Recognising and addressing these challenges is essential to support trials involving these populations and ensure that they have an equitable opportunity to participate in, and benefit from, research. Given the complex nature of these challenges, which are encountered by both adults and children, a cross-disciplinary approach is required. DISCUSSION: A UK-wide collaboration, a sub-group of the Trial Conduct Working Group in the MRC-NIHR Trial Methodology Research Partnership, was formed to collectively address these challenges. Members are drawn from disciplines including bioethics, qualitative research, trials methodology, healthcare professions, and social sciences. This commentary draws on our collective expertise to identify key populations where particular methodological and ethical challenges around consent are encountered, articulate the specific issues arising in each population, summarise ongoing and completed research, and identify targets for future research. Key populations include people with communication or other disabilities, people whose capacity to consent fluctuates, adults who lack the capacity to consent, and adults and children in emergency and urgent care settings. Work is ongoing by the sub-group to create a database of resources, to update NIHR guidance, and to develop proposals to address identified research gaps. CONCLUSION: Collaboration across disciplines, sectors, organisations, and countries is essential if the ethical and methodological challenges surrounding trials involving complex and alternate consent pathways are to be addressed. Explicating these challenges, sharing resources, and identifying gaps for future research is an essential first step. We hope that doing so will serve as a call to action for others seeking ways to address the current consent-based exclusion of underserved populations from trials.

ECCO Topical Review on Biological Treatment Cycles in Crohn's Disease.

There are now a growing number of licensed biological therapies for patients with Crohn's disease. However, there can be significant costs associated with long-term maintenance treatment, as well as some concerns about potential side-effects. As a result, there has been increasing interest in elective biological treatment discontinuation in selected patients, after a sustained period of remission. Following discontinuation, in cases of relapse, evidence to date has suggested that remission may often be regained by re-treatment with the same biological agent. Therefore, a concept has emerged in which cycles of biological therapy might be used. If this treatment strategy were to be applied in a subgroup of patients at low risk of relapse, cycling might allow a substantial number of patients to have a lower, overall therapeutic burden-ensuring decreased exposure to biological therapy but still enabling appropriate disease control. Currently, there remains uncertainty about the benefit-risk balance for using cycles of biological treatment for patients with Crohn's disease. Accordingly, an expert panel was convened by the European Crohn's and Colitis Organisation [ECCO] to review the published literature and agree a series of consensus practice points. The panel aimed to provide evidence-based guidance on multiple aspects of biological treatment discontinuation and cycling, including the risk of relapse after elective treatment discontinuation, predictors of probable relapse or remission, safety, patient preferences, and pharmacoeconomic aspects. Crucially, discussions about biological treatment discontinuation and cycling should be individualized, to enable shared decision-making by patients with their clinicians.

IBD Journal Editorial Fellowship: A Practical Guide for Future Fellows.

Inflammatory Bowel Diseases offers an editorial fellowship for GI and IBD fellows with a background in clinical, translational, and basic research and who are interested to experience the editorial process. Herein, the inaugural fellows compile their experience as a guide for future applicants on the fellowship's responsibilities and highlights.

Subgroup analyses in randomized controlled trials frequently categorized continuous subgroup information.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: To investigate how subgroup analyses of published Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) are performed when subgroups are created from continuous variables. METHODS: We carried out a review of RCTs published in 2016-2021 that included subgroup analyses. Information was extracted on whether any of the subgroups were based on continuous variables and, if so, how they were analyzed. RESULTS: Out of 428 reviewed papers, 258 (60.4%) reported RCTs with a subgroup analysis. Of these, 178/258 (69%) had at least one subgroup formed from a continuous variable and 14/258 (5.4%) were unclear. The vast majority (169/178, 94.9%) dichotomized the continuous variable and treated the subgroup as categorical. The most common way of dichotomizing was using a pre-specified cutpoint (129/169, 76.3%), followed by a data-driven cutpoint (26/169, 15.4%), such as the median. CONCLUSION: It is common for subgroup analyses to use continuous variables to define subgroups. The vast majority dichotomize the continuous variable and, consequently, may lose substantial amounts of statistical information (equivalent to reducing the sample size by at least a third). More advanced methods that can improve efficiency, through optimally choosing cutpoints or directly using the continuous information, are rarely used.