Strategies implemented for accurate dispensing of an investigational new drug in a multi-site HIV prevention clinical trial.

Safe practices for dispensing investigational product (IP) during clinical trials are not standardized and information in this regard is often limited. ASPIRE was a Phase 3 safety and effectiveness trial of a vaginal matrix ring containing 25 mg of dapivirine for the prevention of HIV-1 in women. The study enrolled 2629 women at 15 clinical research sites in Malawi, Uganda, South Africa and Zimbabwe who were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive either a vaginal ring containing 25 mg of dapivirine or a matching placebo vaginal ring. The vaginal rings and packaging were identical in appearance in order to maintain the study blind. A real-time, documented second check of the dispensing process was conducted by a second pharmacy staff. Frequent inventory counts and real time accountability audits were also useful for rapidly identifying a dispensing error. A total of 52,625 vaginal rings were dispensed with only three documented pharmacy dispensing errors. There were zero dispensing errors at 13 of the 15 sites with an overall rate of <1.0 per 10,000 rings dispensed. Our study findings support the implementation of a double check dispensing process and real time accountability audits as standard practice in clinical trials.

The EUROCARE-5 study on cancer survival in Europe 1999-2007: Database, quality checks and statistical analysis methods.

BACKGROUND: Since 25years the EUROCARE study monitors the survival of cancer patients in Europe through centralised collection, quality check and statistical analysis of population-based cancer registries (CRs) data. The European population covered by the study increased remarkably in the latest round. The study design and statistical methods were also changed to improve timeliness and comparability of survival estimates. To interpret the EUROCARE-5 results on adult cancer patients better here we assess the impact of these changes on data quality and on survival comparisons. METHODS: In EUROCARE-5 the survival differences by area were studied applying the complete cohort approach to data on nearly nine million cancer patients diagnosed in 2000-2007 and followed up to 2008. Survival time trends were analysed applying the period approach to data on about 10 million cancer cases diagnosed from 1995 to 2007 and followed up to 2008. Differently from EUROCARE-4, multiple primary cancers were included and relative survival was estimated with the Ederer II method. RESULTS: EUROCARE-5 covered a population of 232 million resident persons, corresponding to 50% of the 29 participating countries. The population coverage increased particularly in Eastern Europe. Cases identified from death certificate only (DCO) were on average 2.9%, range 0-12%. Microscopically confirmed cases amounted to over 85% in most CRs. Compared to previous methods, including multiple cancers and using the Ederer II estimator reduced survival estimates by 0.4 and 0.3 absolute percentage points, on average. CONCLUSIONS: The increased population size and registration coverage of the EUROCARE-5 study ensures more robust and comparable estimates across European countries. This enlargement did not impact on data quality, which was generally satisfactory. Estimates may be slightly inflated in countries with high or null DCO proportions, especially for poor prognosis cancers. The updated methods improved the comparability of survival estimates between recently and long-term established registries and reduced biases due to informative censoring.