Decentralisation in Clinical Trials and Patient Centricity: Benefits and Challenges.

Decentralised clinical trials (DCTs) encompass various terms such as virtual, home-based, remote and siteless trials. The objectives of DCTs are to enhance the ease of participation for patients in clinical trials by minimising or removing the necessity for trial subjects to travel to the trial sites. This approach has been shown to reduce drop-out rates, increase study effectiveness and ultimately get life-altering drugs to market faster-saving sponsors billions. At the outset, DCTs deploy a wide range of digital technologies to collect safety and efficacy data from study participants, providing study treatments and performing investigations from the comfort of the patient's own home. The aim of decentralised trials includes patient centricity, enhanced efficacy in clinical trial conduct and generating real-world data. This is done by not only making it convenient for the patient to participate in the trial execution, but also involving them from the planning stage and taking their inputs during designing of trials and consenting documentation, understanding their treatment requirements and designing the studies accordingly. Various regulatory authorities have published guidelines governing DCT principles, especially after the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) experience of undertaking multicentric clinical trials. Both United States Food and Drug Administration (USFDA) and European Medicines Agency (EMA) have newer, recently updated guidelines to capture this growing reality to undertake clinical trials using patient technology or patient-centric technologies. Other regulatory agencies are accepting data generated using decentralised and patient-centric technologies and making an effort to include elements of decentralised trials in their regulatory guidelines. Decentralised trials follow a hybrid approach to have a balanced mix of remote and in-person data collection and trial procedures. Decentralised and patient-centric approaches are the future of any organisation for the conduct of clinical trials. Globally, all sponsor pharmaceutical companies must start undertaking drug development and clinical trials using a decentralised approach while keeping patient centricity in mind.

Efficacy and Safety of Naftifine Hydrochloride 2% Gel in Interdigital Tinea Pedis: A Phase III Randomised, Double-Blind, Parallel-Group, Active-Controlled Study in Indian Adult Patients.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Naftifine, an allylamine, is highly effective against tinea pedis and exhibits relatively greater affinity to skin and nail beds, possibly due to its high lipophilicity. To study the efficacy and safety of naftifine 2% gel in an Indian population, a phase III multicentre double-blind, comparative, parallel-group study was conducted in comparison with miconazole 2% gel in patients with interdigital tinea pedis, with mild to moderate symptoms. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients presenting with mild to moderate signs and symptoms of interdigital tinea pedis and mycologically confirmed tinea infection were randomised to either naftifine hydrochloride 2% gel (n = 112) or miconazole 2% gel (n = 112) in 1:1 ratio. All patients were treated for 2 weeks with a follow-up of up to 12 weeks. Study evaluations were done at the end of 2, 6, and 12 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving clinical cure at week 6 (± 4 days) and secondary endpoints were the mycological cure at week 6 and week 12 and complete cure at week 12. RESULTS: At the end of week 6, clinical cure was 54.55% and 50.00% in the naftifine and miconazole groups (p = 0.4960), respectively, and it was increased to 78.18% and 76.36% in the naftifine and miconazole group (p = 0.7455) at the end of week 12. Mycological and clinical cure were similar in the naftifine and miconazole groups at week 6 and week 12. The safety and tolerability profiles of both treatments were similar. CONCLUSIONS: Naftifine 2% gel was efficacious and safe for the treatment of mild to moderate interdigital tinea pedis. Its clinical effectiveness was comparable to that of miconazole 2% gel. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials Registry of India: CTRI/2021/01/030753.

A Real-World Study of Safety, Immunogenicity and Efficacy of Bevacizumab in Patients With Solid Malignancies: A Phase IV, Post-Marketing Study in India.

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the post-marketing safety, tolerability, immunogenicity and efficacy of Bevacizumab (manufactured by Hetero Biopharma) in a broader population of patients with solid tumors. Patients And Methods: This phase IV, prospective, multi-centric clinical study was carried out in Indian patients with solid malignancies (metastatic colorectal cancer, non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer, metastatic renal cell carcinoma) treated with Bevacizumab between April 2018 and July 2019. This study included 203 patients from 16 tertiary care oncology centers across India for safety assessment, of which a subset of 115 patients who have consented were also evaluated for efficacy and immunogenicity. This study was prospectively registered in the Clinical Trial Registry of India (CTRI), and was commenced only after receiving approval from the competent authority (Central Drugs Standard Control Organization, CDSCO). Results: Out of the 203 enrolled patients, 121 (59.6%) patients reported 338 adverse events (AEs) during this study. Of 338 reported AEs, 14 serious adverse events (SAEs) were reported by 13 patients including 6 fatal SAEs, assessed as unrelated to the study medication and 7 non-fatal SAEs, 5 assessed as related, and 3 unrelated to Bevacizumab. Most AEs reported in this study (33.9%) were general disorders and administration site conditions, followed by gastrointestinal disorders (29.1%). The most frequently reported AEs were diarrhea (11.3%), asthenia (10.3%), headache (8.9%), pain (7.4%), vomiting (7.9%), and neutropenia (5.9%). At the end of the study, 2 (1.75%) of 69 patients reported antibodies to Bevacizumab without affecting safety and efficacy. However, at the end of 12 months, no patient had reported antibodies to Bevacizumab. Complete response (CR), partial response (PR), stable disease (SD), and progressive disease (PD) were reported in 18.3%, 22.6%, 9.6%, and 8.7% of patients, respectively. The overall response rate (CR + PR) was reported in 40.9% of patients at the end of the study. Disease control rate (DCR), also known as the clinical benefit rate (CBR) was reported in 50.4% of patients. Conclusions: Bevacizumab (Cizumab, Hetero Biopharma) was observed to be safe, well tolerated, lacking immunogenicity, and efficacious in the treatment of solid tumors. The findings of this phase IV study of Bevacizumab, primarily as a combination therapy regimen suggest its suitability and rationality for usage in multiple solid malignancies. Clinical Trial Registry Number: CTRI/2018/4/13371 [Registered on CTRI http://ctri.nic.in/Clinicaltrials/advsearch.php : 19/04/2018]; Trial Registered Prospectively.

Efficacy and safety of fixed-dose combination of Bilastine-Montelukast in adult patients with allergic rhinitis: a phase III, randomized, multi-center, double-blind, active controlled clinical study.

BACKGROUND: Histamine and cysteinyl leukotrienes (CysLTs) are potent inflammatory mediators in allergic rhinitis (AR). Studies involving other combinations of antihistaminics (Levocetirizine) and highly selective leukotriene receptor antagonist (LTA) (Montelukast) combination have shown additive benefits and are widely prescribed for AR. OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the efficacy and safety of Bilastine 20 mg and Montelukast 10 mg fixed-dose combination (FDC) therapy in patients with AR. METHODS: A randomized, double-blind, comparative, parallel, phase III study was conducted to evaluate efficacy and safety of Bilastine 20 mg and Montelukast 10 mg FDC at 16 tertiary care otolaryngology centres in India. Adult patients with AR for one year with IgE antibody positive and 12-h NSS score >36 in 3 days were randomized to receive either Bilastine 20 mg and Montelukast 10 mg or Montelukast 10 mg & Levocetirizine 5 mg tablets for 4 weeks. The change in total symptom score (nasal symptom scores (NSS) & non-nasal symptom scores (NNSS)) from baseline to week 4 was assessed as primary endpoint. Secondary endpoints included changes in TSS, NSS, NNSS, individual symptom scores (ISS), Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life (RQLQ), discomfort due to rhinitis (VAS), and clinical global impression (CGI) scores. RESULTS: The change in mean TSS from baseline to week 4 in Test group (16.6 units) was comparable to reference group (17 units) (p= 0.8876). The difference in change in mean NSS, NNSS and ISS from baseline to day 7, 14, 28 were comparable. RQLQ improved from baseline to Day 28. Significant improvements were observed in discomfort due to AR measured by VAS and CGI scores from baseline to day 14 and 28. The safety and tolerability of patients were comparable between the groups. All adverse events (AEs) were mild to moderate in severity. No patient discontinued due to AEs. CONCLUSIONS: The FDC of Bilastine 20 mg and Montelukast 10 mg was efficacious and well tolerated in Indian patients with AR.

Safety, Tolerability, and Immunogenicity of Prescribed Usage of Darbepoetin-Alfa (Hetero Biopharma) in Patients of Chronic Kidney Disease With Renal Anemia: A Post-Marketing Surveillance Study.

Background This post-marketing surveillance (PMS), observational, prospective, safety study evaluated the safety, tolerability, and long-term immunogenicity of prescribed usage of Darbepoetin alfa (DA-α, manufactured by Hetero Biopharma, Hyderabad, India) in Indian patients having chronic kidney disease (CKD) with anemia. Methods All patients having chronic kidney disease with anemia and prescribed Hetero-Darbepoetin were the target patient population. The present study gathered the data from 503 Hetero-Darbepoetin alfa prescribed patients. This study collected information of patient demography, patient's medical history, concomitant medications, action taken with respect to Hetero-Darbepoetin-alfa, adverse events details (AE term, start date, stop date, severity, action taken, outcome, and causality), periodic hemoglobin (Hb) levels, and abnormal laboratory tests results until treatment is discontinued or the patient is lost to follow-up. Immunogenicity data were collected in 121 patients at the end of treatment and after one year. Results Eighty-seven AEs were reported in this study and most of them were mild to moderate in intensity. No deaths or serious adverse events (SAEs) were reported in this study. Anti-drug antibodies were not detected in any subject at the end of the treatment phase and after 12 months long-term follow-up period. The baseline mean hemoglobin value was 8.34 (SD 1.24) g/dL and the last visit mean hemoglobin value was 10.42 ± 1.24 (mean ± SD) g/dL. The mean difference between baseline and last visit in hemoglobin value was 2.10 [2.00, 2.20], statistically significant (p-value <0.0001). Conclusions The safety and tolerability of the usage of DA-α are similar to that reported in the published literature of the innovator. No patients showed anti-drug antibodies after treatment. Additionally, the patients also showed significant improvement in hemoglobin levels, compared to baseline.

Efficacy and Safety of Orally Administered Acotiamide Extended-Release Tablets Among Functional Dyspepsia-Postprandial Distress Syndrome Patients: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Multicenter Study.

BACKGROUND: Acotiamide, is the world's first-in-class, prokinetic drug and world's first approved treatment for postprandial distress syndrome (PDS) symptoms of functional dyspepsia (FD). An extended-release (ER) formulation of this drug product, developed first-time in the world has been evaluated in phase 3, a comparative trial to explore the efficacy and safety in patients with FD-PDS. METHODS: In this study, 219 patients with FD-PDS aged 18-65 years were randomized (1:1) to receive either acotiamide ER 300 mg once daily or acotiamide 100 mg three times daily for four weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint was responder rates for the overall treatment effect (OTE) at end of week 4. Secondary efficacy endpoints included OTE at each week, elimination rate of postprandial fullness, upper abdominal bloating and early satiation, improvement of individual symptom scores, and quality of life (QoL). The safety endpoints included assessments of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). RESULTS: The responder rate for OTE at the end of the four week period, in acotiamide ER 300 mg OD versus acotiamide 100 mg TID group was 92.66% and 94.39% (97.5% CI -8.3,4.8), respectively, in per-protocol (PP) population and 92.66% and 92.73% (97.5% CI -7.0,6.8), respectively, in intent to treat (ITT) population. All other secondary efficacy endpoints, including QoL, were significantly improved with acotiamide ER 300 mg. Both the formulations of acotiamide significantly improved symptom severity and eliminated meal-related symptoms in patients with FD. Adverse events were reported by 7.9% of patients in acotiamide ER 300 mg and 9.2% in acotiamide 100 mg patients; the most common adverse event reported was a headache. CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy and safety of acotiamide ER 300 mg once daily were observed to be comparable to acotiamide immediate release 100 mg thrice daily. A significant improvement in QoL over a four-week treatment period in FD-PDS patients was observed.

Correction to: Efficacy, tolerability and safety of darbepoetin alfa injection for the treatment of anemia associated with chronic kidney disease (CKD) undergoing dialysis: a randomized, phase-III trial.

Following publication of the original article [1], the authors reported errors in the presentation of Tables 2, 4 and 5.

Efficacy, tolerability and safety of darbepoetin alfa injection for the treatment of anemia associated with chronic kidney disease (CKD) undergoing dialysis: a randomized, phase-III trial.

BACKGROUND: Darbepoetin alfa (DA-α) is a long-acting erythropoiesis-stimulating glycoprotein which has half-life three-fold longer than that of Erythropoietin alfa (EPO). The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of DA-α injection versus EPO for treating renal anemia amongst Indian patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) undergoing dialysis. METHODS: Patients of either gender (aged 18-65 years) with ESRD undergoing dialysis who had hemoglobin (Hb) levels < 10 g/dL after receiving EPO were switched to DA-α (0.45 µg/kg) once weekly subcutaneously or EPO 50 IU/kg thrice weekly subcutaneously (centrally randomized 1:1) for 12-24 weeks (correction phase) followed by 12 weeks maintenance phase (for Hb levels ≥10 g/dL). The primary efficacy endpoint was mean change in Hb level from baseline to end of correction phase. RESULTS: In the intention-to-treat population (n = 126), the between group difference in mean Hb change was - 0.01 g/dL (95% CI - 0.68 to - 0.66, p = 0.97). After adjusting for covariates, the difference was - 0.2878 g/dL (95% CI -0.936 to0.360). The lower limit of the two-sided 95% CI of primary endpoint was above the pre-specified non-inferiority margin of - 1.0 g/dL. Similar trend of non-inferiority was observed for per-protocol population. Safety profile of DA-α and EPO were observed to be similar. CONCLUSION: Our study results demonstrated that for patients with ESRD undergoing dialysis, administering DA-α at lower dose frequency, is equally effective and well tolerated as EPO for treating renal anemia. TRIAL REGISTRATION: CTRI/2012/07/002835 [Registered on: 27/07/2012]; Trial Registered Prospectively.