Systematic review on costs and resource use of randomized clinical trials shows a lack of transparent and comprehensive data

Maxillary sinus lift augmentation: A randomized clinical trial with histological data comparing deproteinized bovine bone grafting vs graftless procedure with a 5-12-year follow-up

INTRODUCTION

Different protocols and procedures for sinus lift and implant placement are available, generally involving the use of grafts to increase the tissue volume and/or prevent the Schneiderian membrane from collapsing. Among xenografts, deproteinised bovine bone graft (DBBP) is frequently used in sinus lift procedures. Leaving an ungrafted space following membrane elevation has proven to have a bony regenerative potential as well. This study aimed to compare the clinical and histological features of sinus lift surgery performed with or without biomaterials.

METHODS

Patients with severe maxillary posterior atrophy (residual bone height 2-6 mm and residual crest thickness ≥4 mm), and in need of sinus lift surgery to allow the placement of three implants were enrolled and randomly divided into two groups. They underwent sinus lifts with DBBP (control) or with a graftless technique (test) and immediate placement of two implants (a mesial and distal one). After 6 months, a bone sample was retrieved from the area between the previously inserted fixtures, and a third, central implant was placed. The collected bone samples were analyzed morphologically and histomorphometrically. The patients were provided with prosthetic restorations after 6 months and followed up for 5-12 years.

RESULTS

Ten patients were enrolled in the test and nine in the control group. The 6-month follow-up showed in the control group an average augmentation of 10.31 mm (±2.12), while in the test group it was 8.5 mm (±1.41) and a success rate of 96.3% in the control and 86.7% in the test group (p > 0.05). The histological analysis evidenced the presence of new bone tissue surrounded by immature osteoid matrix in the test group, and a variable number of DBBP particles surrounded by an immature woven bone matrix in the control group.

CONCLUSION

The results of the present trial indicate that, with residual bone height of 2-6 mm and residual crest thickness ≥4 mm, sinus lift surgery with or without biomaterials followed by implant restoration, produces similar clinical and histological outcomes.

Use of Evidence-Based Research Approach in RCTs of Acupuncture-Related Therapies for Primary Dysmenorrhea: A Meta-Research

OBJECTIVE

To assess the use of evidence-based research (EBR) approach in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of acupuncture-related therapies for primary dysmenorrhea (PD).

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Database, Chinese Biomedical Database, and China Science and Technology Journal Database were searched from January 2013 to December 2022 for RCTs of acupuncture on PD. The full text and references of each RCT were read to assess whether systematic reviews (SRs) or other types of studies with similar research questions and end-users' perspectives were cited to justify and design the trial. In addition, the discussion section were analyzed to evaluate whether trials placed the new result in the existing SRs to draw a conclusion. Multivariable logistic regression was used to find variables that associated with 3 aspects of EBR approach: (1) citing clinical studies for justification, (2) citing relevant studies that obtain the perspectives of end users, and (3) citing clinical studies for results discussion.

RESULTS

Of 473 RCTs included, 45.67% (216) of the trials cited relevant similar studies, 21.56% (102) referenced to the studies that collected end-users' perspectives, and 10.99% (52) placed result in the context of the previous research. Few RCTs appropriately applied EBR approach. Among all the included studies, 3.17% (15) of the trials used SRs to inform study questions but none of them used updated SRs with acceptable quality; 1.05% (5) of the trials cited SRs of end-user's perspectives in the justification and design of the study, and only 1 trial added results in existing SR to draw a conclusion. Year of publication, language, funding, registration, ethical approval and number of sites were significantly associated with 1 of the 3 aspects of EBR approach.

CONCLUSIONS

Few RCTs in acupuncture-related therapies for PD used the EBR approach to minimize research redundancy. Researchers, research institutes, funding agencies, ethics committees, journals and peer reviewers in acupuncture should make efforts to use and promote the EBR approach to ensure the value of new trials.

Composite outcome measures in high-impact critical care randomised controlled trials: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The use of composite outcome measures (COM) in clinical trials is increasing. Whilst their use is associated with benefits, several limitations have been highlighted and there is limited literature exploring their use within critical care. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the use of COM in high-impact critical care trials, and compare study parameters (including sample size, statistical significance, and consistency of effect estimates) in trials using composite versus non-composite outcomes.

METHODS

A systematic review of 16 high-impact journals was conducted. Randomised controlled trials published between 2012 and 2022 reporting a patient important outcome and involving critical care patients, were included.

RESULTS

8271 trials were screened, and 194 included. 39.1% of all trials used a COM and this increased over time. Of those using a COM, only 52.6% explicitly described the outcome as composite. The median number of components was 2 (IQR 2-3). Trials using a COM recruited fewer participants (409 (198.8-851.5) vs 584 (300-1566, p = 0.004), and their use was not associated with increased rates of statistical significance (19.7% vs 17.8%, p = 0.380). Predicted effect sizes were overestimated in all but 6 trials. For studies using a COM the effect estimates were consistent across all components in 43.4% of trials. 93% of COM included components that were not patient important.

CONCLUSIONS

COM are increasingly used in critical care trials; however effect estimates are frequently inconsistent across COM components confounding outcome interpretations. The use of COM was associated with smaller sample sizes, and no increased likelihood of statistically significant results. Many of the limitations inherent to the use of COM are relevant to critical care research.

Characterizing atrial fibrillation symptom improvement following de novo catheter ablation

AIMS

Atrial fibrillation (AF) symptom relief is a primary indication for catheter ablation, but AF symptom resolution is not well characterized. The study objective was to describe AF symptom documentation in electronic health records (EHRs) pre- and post-ablation and identify correlates of post-ablation symptoms.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study using EHRs of patients with AF (n = 1293), undergoing ablation in a large, urban health system from 2010 to 2020. We extracted symptom data from clinical notes using a natural language processing algorithm (F score: 0.81). We used Cochran's Q tests with post-hoc McNemar's tests to determine differences in symptom prevalence pre- and post-ablation. We used logistic regression models to estimate the adjusted odds of symptom resolution by personal or clinical characteristics at 6 and 12 months post-ablation. In fully adjusted models, at 12 months post-ablation patients, patients with heart failure had significantly lower odds of dyspnoea resolution [odds ratio (OR) 0.38, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.25-0.57], oedema resolution (OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.25-0.56), and fatigue resolution (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.34-0.85), but higher odds of palpitations resolution (OR 1.90, 95% CI 1.25-2.89) compared with those without heart failure. Age 65 and older, female sex, Black or African American race, smoking history, and antiarrhythmic use were also associated with lower odds of resolution of specific symptoms at 6 and 12 months.

CONCLUSION

The post-ablation symptom patterns are heterogeneous. Findings warrant confirmation with larger, more representative data sets, which may be informative for patients whose primary goal for undergoing an ablation is symptom relief.

Evaluating registry-based trial economics: Results from the STRESS clinical trial

Background

Registry-based trials have the potential to reduce randomized clinical trial (RCT) costs. However, observed cost differences also may be achieved through pragmatic trial designs. A systematic comparison of trial costs across different designs has not been previously performed.

Methods

We conducted a study to compare the current Steroids to Reduce Systemic inflammation after infant heart surgery (STRESS) registry-based RCT vs. two established designs: pragmatic RCT and explanatory RCT. The primary outcome was total RCT design costs. Secondary outcomes included: RCT duration and personnel hours. Costs were estimated using the Duke Clinical Research Institute's pricing model.

Results

The Registry-Based RCT estimated duration was 31.9 weeks greater than the other designs (259.5 vs. 227.6 weeks). This delay was caused by the Registry-Based design's periodic data harvesting that delayed site closing and statistical reporting. Total personnel hours were greatest for the Explanatory design followed by the Pragmatic design and the Registry-Based design (52,488 vs 29,763 vs. 24,480 h, respectively). Total costs were greatest for the Explanatory design followed by the Pragmatic design and the Registry-Based design ($10,140,263 vs. $4,164,863 vs. $3,268,504, respectively). Thus, Registry-Based total costs were 32 % of the Explanatory and 78 % of the Pragmatic design.

Conclusion

Total costs for the STRESS RCT with a registry-based design were less than those for a pragmatic design and much less than an explanatory design. Cost savings reflect design elements and leveraging of registry resources to improve cost efficiency, but delays to trial completion should be considered.

Using clinical cases to guide healthcare

Evidence-based practice (EBP) has been the gold standard in healthcare for nearly three centuries and aims to assist physicians in providing the safest and most effective healthcare for their patients. The well-established hierarchy of evidence lists systematic reviews and meta-analyses at the top however these methodologies are not always appropriate or possible and in these instances case-control studies, case series and case reports are utilised to support EBP. Case-control studies allow simultaneous study of multiple risk factors and can be performed rapidly and relatively cheaply. A recent example was during the Coronavirus pandemic where case-control studies were used to assess the efficacy of personal protective equipment for healthcare workers. Case series and case reports also play a role in EBP and are particularly useful to study rare diseases such as inflammatory bowel disease in transgender and gender non-conforming individuals. They are also vital in generating and disseminating early signals and encouraging further research. Whilst these methodologies have weaknesses, particularly with regards to bias and loss of patient confidentiality for rare pathologies, they have an important part to play in EBP and when appropriately utilised can significantly impact upon clinical practice.

Characteristics, Progression, and Output of Randomized Platform Trials: A Systematic Review

Importance

Platform trials have become increasingly common, and evidence is needed to determine how this trial design is actually applied in current research practice.

Objective

To determine the characteristics, progression, and output of randomized platform trials.

Evidence Review

In this systematic review of randomized platform trials, Medline, Embase, Scopus, trial registries, gray literature, and preprint servers were searched, and citation tracking was performed in July 2022. Investigators were contacted in February 2023 to confirm data accuracy and to provide updated information on the status of platform trial arms. Randomized platform trials were eligible if they explicitly planned to add or drop arms. Data were extracted in duplicate from protocols, publications, websites, and registry entries. For each platform trial, design features such as the use of a common control arm, use of nonconcurrent control data, statistical framework, adjustment for multiplicity, and use of additional adaptive design features were collected. Progression and output of each platform trial were determined by the recruitment status of individual arms, the number of arms added or dropped, and the availability of results for each intervention arm.

Findings

The search identified 127 randomized platform trials with a total of 823 arms; most trials were conducted in the field of oncology (57 [44.9%]) and COVID-19 (45 [35.4%]). After a more than twofold increase in the initiation of new platform trials at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, the number of platform trials has since declined. Platform trial features were often not reported (not reported: nonconcurrent control, 61 of 127 [48.0%]; multiplicity adjustment for arms, 98 of 127 [77.2%]; statistical framework, 37 of 127 [29.1%]). Adaptive design features were only used by half the studies (63 of 127 [49.6%]). Results were available for 65.2% of closed arms (230 of 353). Premature closure of platform trial arms due to recruitment problems was infrequent (5 of 353 [1.4%]).

Conclusions and Relevance

This systematic review found that platform trials were initiated most frequently during the COVID-19 pandemic and declined thereafter. The reporting of platform features and the availability of results were insufficient. Premature arm closure for poor recruitment was rare.

Accuracy of heart failure ascertainment using routinely collected healthcare data: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Ascertainment of heart failure (HF) hospitalizations in cardiovascular trials is costly and complex, involving processes that could be streamlined by using routinely collected healthcare data (RCD). The utility of coded RCD for HF outcome ascertainment in randomized trials requires assessment. We systematically reviewed studies assessing RCD-based HF outcome ascertainment against "gold standard" (GS) methods to study the feasibility of using such methods in clinical trials.

METHODS

Studies assessing International Classification of Disease (ICD) coded RCD-based HF outcome ascertainment against GS methods and reporting at least one agreement statistic were identified by searching MEDLINE and Embase from inception to May 2021. Data on study characteristics, details of RCD and GS data sources and definitions, and test statistics were reviewed. Summary sensitivities and specificities for studies ascertaining acute and prevalent HF were estimated using a bivariate random effects meta-analysis. Heterogeneity was evaluated using I2 statistics and hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic (HSROC) curves.

RESULTS

A total of 58 studies of 48,643 GS-adjudicated HF events were included in this review. Strategies used to improve case identification included the use of broader coding definitions, combining multiple data sources, and using machine learning algorithms to search free text data, but these methods were not always successful and at times reduced specificity in individual studies. Meta-analysis of 17 acute HF studies showed that RCD algorithms have high specificity (96.2%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 91.5-98.3), but lacked sensitivity (63.5%, 95% CI 51.3-74.1) with similar results for 21 prevalent HF studies. There was considerable heterogeneity between studies.

CONCLUSIONS

RCD can correctly identify HF outcomes but may miss approximately one-third of events. Methods used to improve case identification should also focus on minimizing false positives.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of recruitment strategies in a large diabetes prevention trial conducted across two sites in Sydney, Australia

BACKGROUND

Diabetes prevention trials require large samples and community-based recruitment, which can be protracted and expensive. We analysed the cost-effectiveness of recruitment strategies used in a randomised placebo-controlled supplement trial in adults with prediabetes and overweight or obesity conducted in Sydney, Australia.

METHODS

Recruitment strategies included advertising through local radio stations and newspapers, television news coverage, online advertising and editorials, advertising in and referral from primary care settings, university- and hospital-based advertising, and attending or hosting local events. For each strategy, the number of expressions of interest, screenings booked, and randomised participants were collated. The percentage contribution from each strategy, overall cost, and cost per participant were calculated.

RESULTS

Of 4498 expressions of interest, 551 (12%) were eligible for onsite screening and 401 (9%) were randomised. Recruitment costs totalled AU$218,501, averaging AU$545 per participant. The recruitment strategy was recorded for 49% who expressed interest in the trial, and for 75% randomised into the trial. From these data, advertising on local radio stations was the most cost-effective strategy, contributing 46% of participants at AU$286 per participant, then advertising in and referral from primary care settings (57 participants [19%], AU$1438 per participant). The least cost-effective strategy was television news coverage, which was not targeted to the Sydney-based audience, contributing only six participants (AU$10,000 per participant).

CONCLUSION

Radio advertising and recruitment through healthcare were the most effective recruitment strategies in this trial. Recruitment strategies should be location-specific and appropriate for the target population, prioritising low-effort high-yield strategies. Trial investigators should seek opportunities for free advertising.

The use of healthcare systems data for RCTs

BACKGROUND

Healthcare systems data (HSD) has the potential to optimise the efficiency of randomised controlled trials (RCTs), by decreasing trial-specific data demands. Therefore, the use of HSD in trials is expected to increase. In 2019, it was estimated that 47% of NIHR-funded trials were planning to use HSD. We aim to understand the extent and nature of its current use and its evolution over time.

METHODS

We identified a cohort of RCTs within the NIHR Journals Library that commenced after 2019 and were described as being in progress on 6 June 2022. Details on the source and use of HSD were extracted from eligible RCTs. The use of HSD was categorised according to whether it was used as the sole data source for outcomes and whether the outcomes were primary or secondary. HSD is often insufficient for patient-reported outcomes (PROs). We aimed to determine methods used by trialists for collecting PRO data alongside HSD.

RESULTS

Of the 84 eligible studies, 52 (62%) planned to use HSD and 79 (94%) planned to collect PROs. The number of RCTs planning to use HSD for at least one outcome was 28 (54%) with 24 of these planning to use HSD as the sole data source for at least one outcome. The number of studies planning to use HSD for primary and secondary outcomes was 10 (20%) and 21 (40%) respectively. The sources of HSD were National Health Service (NHS) Digital (n = 37, 79%), patient registries (n = 7, 29%), primary care (n = 5, 21%), The Office for National Statistics (ONS) (n = 3, 13%) and other (n = 2, 8%). PROs were collected for 92% of the trials planning to use HSD. Methods for collection of PROs included in-person (n = 26, 54%), online (n = 22, 46%), postal (n = 18, 38%), phone (n = 14, 29%) and app (n = 2, 4%).

CONCLUSIONS

HSD is being used in around two thirds of the studies but cannot yet be used to support PRO data collection within the cohort we examined. Comparison with an earlier cohort demonstrates an increase in the number of RCTs planning to use HSD.

Reporting of post-protocol therapies in metastatic breast cancer registration clinical trials: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

As the treatment for metastatic breast cancer (MBC) often includes sequential lines of therapy, data on post-protocol treatment in clinical trials are valuable in the assessment of long-term outcomes. The objective of this study was to assess the reported data on post-protocol therapy in clinical trials supporting US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval of drugs for MBC.

METHODS

All initial and subsequent publications related to FDA approved indications for MBC between January 2000 and February 2023 were identified. Collected data included study design, patients' characteristics and whether reporting on post-protocol therapy was available. Differences in study design and population between studies with and without data on post-protocol therapy were evaluated.

FINDINGS

Forty-one indications for MBC were identified. Data were evaluated from 249 publications or abstracts, comprising 20,152 patients. Reporting of post-protocol therapy was available for 22 (53.7 %) indications. Reported data were often incomplete. Reporting has not improved over time with reported data in 50 % and 55.2 % studies between 2000 and 2010 and 2011-2023 (p value for the difference = 1.0), respectively. Studies with OS as their primary endpoints were associated with significantly higher reporting of post-protocol therapy, (p = 0.02). Other characteristics of study design and population were comparable between studies with and without data on post-protocol therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Data on post-protocol therapy in trials supporting FDA approval of drugs for MBC are available for only half of the indications. As subsequent lines of therapy may have a crucial role in patients' outcome, post-protocol reporting should be included in the regulatory submission and be made available publicly.

Designing and Implementing "Living and Breathing" Clinical Trials: An Overview and Lessons Learned from the COVID-19 Pandemic

The practice of medicine is characterized by uncertainty, and the findings of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) are meant to help curb that uncertainty. Traditional RCTs, however, have many limitations. To overcome some of these limitations, new trial paradigms rooted in the origins of evidence-based medicine are beginning to disrupt the traditional mold. These new designs recognize uncertainty permeates medical decision making and aim to capitalize on modern health system infrastructure to integrate investigation as a component of care delivery. This article provides an overview of "living, breathing" trials, including current state, anticipated developments, and areas of controversy.

Recommendations in the design and conduction of randomised controlled trials in human and veterinary homeopathic medicine

BACKGROUND

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are an established research method to investigate the effects of an intervention. Several recent systematic reviews and meta-analyses of RCTs with homeopathic interventions have identified shortcomings in design, conduct, analysis, and reporting of trials. Guidelines for RCTs in homeopathic medicine are lacking.

OBJECTIVES

This paper aims to fill this gap in order to enhance the quality of RCTs in the field of homeopathy.

METHODS

Identification of the homeopathy-specific requirements for RCTs by reviewing literature and experts' communications. Systematization of the findings using a suitable checklist for planning, conducting, and reporting RCTs, namely the SPIRIT statement, and high-quality homeopathy RCTs as examples. Cross-checking of the created checklist with the RedHot-criteria, the PRECIS criteria, and a qualitative evaluation checklist. Consideration of the REFLECT statement and the ARRIVE Guidelines 2.0 for veterinary homeopathy.

RESULTS

Recommendations for future implementation of RCTs in homeopathy are summarized in a checklist. Alongside, identified useful solutions to the issues encountered when designing and conducting homeopathy RCTs are presented.

CONCLUSIONS

The formulated recommendations present guidelines additional to those in the SPIRIT checklist, on how to better plan, design, conduct, and report RCTs in homeopathy.

Do single-case experimental designs lead to randomised controlled trials of cognitive behavioural therapy interventions for adolescent anxiety and related disorders recommended in the National Institute of Clinical Excellence guidelines? A systematic review

Background

Although Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT) is effective for 60% of adolescents with anxiety disorders, only 36% are in remission post-intervention. This indicates that more effective treatments are needed which should be reflected in the NICE guidelines. We hypothesised that Single-case experimental designs (SCEDs) may provide a framework for accelerating the development of novel interventions. The primary purpose of this review was to investigate whether SCEDs are currently followed by randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of CBT intervention for adolescent anxiety disorders named in the NICE guidelines. The secondary objective was to investigate whether using SCEDs prior to RCTs could be a helpful approach.

Method

For the primary search of SCEDs five databases were used (PsycINFO, PubMed, PsycArticles, Web of Science and ProQuest). Nineteen articles met eligibility criteria including a total of 107 participants. For the secondary search of RCTs named in the NICE guidelines for adolescent anxiety disorders 53 articles met inclusion criteria and were included in the systematic review.

Results

The 19 SCED studies included in the review were conducted with participants with a diverse range of anxiety disorders and across a range of CBT formats. Two of the SCEDs were followed by RCTs, but neither of these were named in the NICE guidelines for anxiety disorders. All of the SCEDs identified were rated as low quality with none meeting the criteria for the highest or second highest quality rating. From the secondary searches, none of the RCTs named in the NICE guide were preceded by SCEDs.

Conclusions

It was concluded that currently SCEDs were not followed by RCTs of CBT interventions named in the NICE guidelines for adolescent anxiety disorders. However, it was suggested that SCEDs may provide an important framework for the development of more effective interventions for adolescents with anxiety.

Cost-effectiveness of surgical treatment of thumb carpometacarpal joint arthritis: a value of information study

BACKGROUND

Thumb carpometacarpal (CMC) joint arthritis is one of the most prevalent arthritic conditions commonly treated with trapeziectomy alone or trapeziectomy with ligament reconstruction and tendon interposition (LRTI). We evaluate the cost-effectiveness and value of perfect and sample information of trapeziectomy alone, LRTI, and non-operative treatment.

METHODS

A societal perspective decision tree was modeled. To understand the value of future research in comparing quality-of-life after trapeziectomy, LRTI, and non-operative management we characterized uncertainty by fitting distributions to EQ-5D utility data published from the United Kingdom hand surgery registry. We used Monte Carlo simulation for the probabilistic sensitivity analysis and to evaluate the value of perfect and sample information.

RESULTS

Both trapeziectomy alone and LRTI were cost-effective compared to non-operative management ($2,540 and $3,511/QALY respectively). Trapeziectomy alone (base case total cost $8,251, QALY 14.08) was dominant compared to LRTI (base case total cost $8,798, QALY 13.34). However, probabilistic sensitivity analysis suggested there is a 12.5% chance LRTI may be preferred at a willingness-to-pay of $50,000/QALY. Sensitivity analysis revealed postoperative utilities are the most influential factors in determining cost-effectiveness. The value of perfect information was approximately $1,503/person. A study evaluating the quality-of-life of 1,000 patients in each arm undergoing trapeziectomy alone or LRTI could provide an expected $1,117 of information value. With approximately 40,000 CMC arthroplasties performed each year in the U.S., the annual value is close to $45 million.

CONCLUSIONS

Trapeziectomy without LRTI appears to be the most cost-effective procedure in treating late-stage CMC arthritis and should be considered as first-line surgical treatment. There is substantial societal value in conducting additional research to better understand the relative quality-of-life improvements gained from these two common hand surgeries.

"And then I found $5": Optimizing recruitment efficiency in remote clinical trials

Introduction

As clinical trials adopt remote methodologies, there is need to optimize efficiency of remote enrollment. Within a remote clinical trial, we aim to (1) assess if sociodemographic factors differ among those consenting via mail vs. technology-based procedures (e-consent), (2) determine if, among those consenting via mail, a small unconditional monetary reward ($5) increases likelihood of subsequent enrollment, (3) economically evaluate additional cost per additional participant enrolled with $5 reward.

Methods

In the parent nationwide randomized clinical trial of adult smokers (N = 638), participants could enroll via mail or e-consent. Logistic regression models assessed relationships between sociodemographics and enrollment via mail (vs e-consent). Mailed consent packets were randomized (1:4) to include $5 unconditional reward or not, and logistic regression modeling examined impact of reward on subsequent enrollment, allowing for a randomized study within a study. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio analysis estimated additional cost per additional participant enrolled with $5 incentive.

Results

Older age, less education, lower income, and female sex predicted enrolling via mail vs e-consent (p < .05's). In adjusted model, older age (AOR = 1.02, p = .016) and less education (AOR = 2.23, p < .001) remained predictive of mail enrollment. The $5 incentive (vs none) increased enrollment rate by 9% (AOR = 1.64, p = .007), with estimated cost of additional $59 per additional participant enrolled.

Conclusions

As e-consent methods become more common, they have potential to reach many individuals but with perhaps diminished inclusion across all sociodemographic groups. Provision of an unconditional monetary incentive is possibly a cost-effective mechanism to increase recruitment efficiency for studies employing mail-based consenting procedures.

Site-specific factors associated with clinical trial recruitment efficiency in general practice settings: a comparative descriptive analysis

BACKGROUND

Recruitment of participants is crucial to the success of randomised control trials (RCTs) but can be challenging and expensive. Current research on trial efficiency is often focused at the patient-level with an emphasis on effective recruitment strategies. Less is known about selection of study sites to optimise recruitment. We examine site-level factors that are associated with patient recruitment and cost efficiency using data from an RCT conducted across 25 general practices (GP) in Victoria, Australia.

METHODS

Data on number of participants screened, excluded, eligible, recruited, and randomised from each study site were extracted from a clinical trial. Details regarding site characteristics, recruitment practices, and staff time commitment were collected using a three-part survey. The key outcomes assessed were recruitment efficiency (ratio of screened to randomised), average time, and cost for each participant recruited and randomised. To identify practice-level factors associated with efficient recruitment and lower cost, outcomes were dichotomised (25th percentile vs others) and each practice-level factor assessed against the outcomes to determine its association.

RESULTS

Across 25 GP study sites, 1968 participants were screened of which 299 (15.2%) were recruited and randomised. The mean recruitment efficiency was 7.2, varying from 1.4 to 19.8 across sites. The strongest factor associated with efficiency was assigning clinical staff to identify potential participants (57.14% vs. 22.2%). The more efficient sites were smaller practices and were more likely to be rural locations and in areas of lower socioeconomic status. The average time used for recruitment was 3.7 h (SD2.4) per patient randomised. The mean cost per patient randomised was $277 (SD161), and this varied from $74 to $797 across sites. The sites identified with the 25% lowest recruitment cost (n = 7) were more experienced in research participation and had high levels of nurse and/or administrative support.

CONCLUSION

Despite the small sample size, this study quantified the time and cost used to recruit patients and provides helpful indications of site-level characteristics that can help improve feasibility and efficiency of conducting RCT in GP settings. Characteristics indicative of high levels of support for research and rural practices, which often tends to be overlooked, were observed to be more efficient in recruiting.

Attitudes About Artificially Intelligent Interactive Voice Response Systems Using Amazon Alexa in Cardiovascular Clinics: Insights from the VOICE-COVID-19 Study

The acceptability of artificially intelligent interactive voice response (AI-IVR) systems in cardiovascular research settings is unclear. As a result, we evaluated peoples' attitudes regarding the Amazon Echo Show 8 device when used for electronic data capture in cardiovascular clinics. Participants were recruited following the Voice-Based Screening for SARS-CoV-2 Exposure in Cardiovascular clinics study. Overall, 215 people enrolled and underwent screening (mean age 46.1; 55% females) in the VOICE-COVID study and 58 people consented to participate in a post-screening survey. Following thematic analysis, four key themes affecting AI-IVR acceptability were identified. These were difficulties with communication (44.8%), limitations with available interaction modalities (41.4%), barriers with the development of therapeutic relationships (25.9%), and concerns with universality and accessibility (8.6%). While there are potential concerns with the use of AI-IVR technologies, these systems appeared to be well accepted in cardiovascular clinics. Increased development of these technologies could significantly improve healthcare access and efficiency.

How much did it cost to develop and implement an eHealth intervention for a minority children population that overlapped with the COVID-19 pandemic?

BACKGROUND

eHealth interventions using active video games (AVGs) offer an alternative method to help children exercise, especially during a pandemic where options are limited. There is limited data on costs associated with developing and implementing such interventions.

OBJECTIVES

We quantified the costs of delivering an eHealth RCT intervention among minority children during COVID-19.

METHODS

We categorized the total trial cost into five subcategories: intervention material development, advertising and recruitment, intervention delivery, personnel salaries, and COVID-19-related equipment costs.

RESULTS

The total RCT cost was $1,927,807 (Direct: $1,227,903; Indirect: $699,904) with three visits required for each participant. The average cost per participant completing the RCT (79 participants/237 visits) was $24,403 (Direct: $15,543; Indirect: $8860). Due to no-shows and cancellations (198 visits) and dropouts before study completion (61 visits; 56 participants), 496 visits had to be scheduled to ensure complete data collection on 79 participants. If all 496 visits were from participants completing the three-visit protocol, that would correspond to 165 participants, bringing the average cost per participant down to $11,684 (Direct: $7442; Indirect: $4242). Of the subcategories, intervention material development accounted for the largest portion, followed by personnel salaries. While the direct COVID-19-specific cost constituted <1% of the entire budget, the indirect effects were much larger and significantly impacted the trial.

CONCLUSION

RCTs typically involve significant resources, even more so during a pandemic. Future eHealth intervention investigators should budget and plan accordingly to prepare for unexpected costs such as recruitment challenges to increase flexibility while maximizing the intervention efficacy.

Pharmacogenomics: current status and future perspectives

Inter-individual variability in drug response, be it efficacy or safety, is common and likely to become an increasing problem globally given the growing elderly population requiring treatment. Reasons for this inter-individual variability include genomic factors, an area of study called pharmacogenomics. With genotyping technologies now widely available and decreasing in cost, implementing pharmacogenomics into clinical practice - widely regarded as one of the initial steps in mainstreaming genomic medicine - is currently a focus in many countries worldwide. However, major challenges of implementation lie at the point of delivery into health-care systems, including the modification of current clinical pathways coupled with a massive knowledge gap in pharmacogenomics in the health-care workforce. Pharmacogenomics can also be used in a broader sense for drug discovery and development, with increasing evidence suggesting that genomically defined targets have an increased success rate during clinical development.

Vedolizumab and Adalimumab in Biologic-Naïve Ulcerative Colitis: Comparison of Patient-Level Clinical Trial Data and VARSITY for Week 6 Clinical Remission

BACKGROUND

Indirect treatment comparisons using patient-level data are increasing in popularity within inflammatory bowel disease research. We compared the efficacy of adalimumab and vedolizumab for biologic-naïve moderate-severe ulcerative colitis (UC) using indirect comparisons of phase 3 clinical trials and compared the results to the RCT VARSITY.

DESIGN

Pooled analysis of patient-level data from 518 biologic-naïve patients with UC was performed using GEMINI-1 and ULTRA-1. Proportions of patients achieving week 6 clinical remission and clinical response were compared, and propensity score matching and multivariate logistic regression were used to account for potential confounders. These results were compared to those derived from VARSITY.

RESULTS

A numerically greater proportion of vedolizumab-treated patients from GEMINI-1 achieved week 6 clinical remission compared to those treated with adalimumab [136/388 (35.1%) vs. 38/130 (29.2%)]. Similar findings were observed among the propensity score matched cohort [33/110 (30.0%) vs. 25/110 (22.7%), adjusted OR (aOR) 1.56 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.81-3.02), p = 0.187]. A similar magnitude for absolute difference in the proportions of patients achieving week 6 clinical remission was observed from VARSITY in vedolizumab compared to adalimumab [131/305 (43.0%) vs. 114/307 (37.1%), OR 1.27 (95% CI 0.92-1.76), p = 0.142].

CONCLUSIONS

In this post hoc analysis, a similar magnitude in the absolute difference of efficacy at week 6 among biologic-naïve patients was observed using indirect comparisons of phase 3 clinical trial data as was observed in VARSITY. Indirect comparisons using patient-level clinical trial data could be used to inform drug choices for future head-to-head trials and guide positioning of drugs in the absence of head-to-head trials.

Oligometastases: Emerging Evidence

The hypothesis that ablative therapies (such as surgery or radiation) can be used to cure patients with a limited number of metastases was influential in changing practice. Early assertions of efficacy were based on observational studies, often without control groups, showing better-than-expected outcomes. However, in the past decade, new evidence from randomized trials has emerged, which in some cases have affirmed old hypotheses, but in other cases have raised new questions. In this review, we discuss the challenges in defining oligometastatic disease, summarize the randomized evidence evaluating metastasis-directed therapy in patients with oligometastatic disease, provide context for the difficulty in generating randomized evidence, and examine ongoing phase III studies.

Effectiveness and cost analysis of methods used to recruit older adult sedative users to a deprescribing randomized controlled trial during the COVID-19 pandemic

Background

Recruitment to clinical trials is a challenge for researchers that became more pronounced because of COVID-19 public health protective measures, especially with respect to studies enrolling older adults. We completed an effectiveness and cost analysis of the recruitment methods used in The Your Answers When Needing Sleep in New Brunswick (YAWNS NB) study, a randomized controlled trial of a deprescribing intervention that recruited older adults with chronic use of sedatives during the pandemic.

Methods

Study recruitment began during the COVID-19 pandemic. Strategies included random digit dialing (RDD), a targeted mail campaign and advertising through newspapers, online platforms (Google and Facebook), and television. Other awareness raising and recruitment strategies involved seniors' organizations, pharmacies, television news stories, and referrals. Recruitment effectiveness and cost analysis involved enrollment rate (ER), cost per randomized participant (CPRP), fractional cost (FC), fractional enrollment (FE), fractional enrollment-cost ratio (FEC), and efficacy index (EI) calculations.

Results

There were 1295 interested older adults with 594 randomized into the study for an enrollment rate of 46%. The efficacy index (EI) was highest for Facebook ads (EI = 0.683) followed by television (EI = 0.426), and newsprint ads (EI = 0.298). The cost of RDD was highest per randomized participant at $1117.90 and produced the lowest EI (0.013).

Conclusion

Facebook ads had the best efficacy index for recruiting older adults to the YAWNS NB study during the COVID-19 pandemic and television ads produced the most enrollments. RDD was expensive and yielded few recruits. Recruitment costs can be significant for recruiting community-dwelling older adults. This experience can inform recruitment strategy and budget development for future community studies enrolling older adults, especially in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Participant Recruitment From Low- and Middle-Income Countries for Pivotal Trials of Drugs Approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration : A Cross-Sectional Analysis

BACKGROUND

Many participants in clinical trials supporting U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) drug approvals are recruited from outside the United States, including from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Where participants are recruited for pivotal trials has implications for ethical research conduct and generalizability.

OBJECTIVE

To describe LMIC recruitment for pivotal trials of newly approved drugs for cancer, neurologic disease, and cardiovascular disease.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional analysis.

SETTING

Pivotal trials of new cancer, cardiovascular, and neurologic drugs approved from 2012 to 2019 matched to ClinicalTrials.gov, FDA records, and publications.

MEASUREMENTS

Host countries and available per country enrollments were extracted. The primary end point was the proportion of pivotal trials enrolling participants in LMICs. The secondary end point was the proportion of pivotal trial participants contributed by LMICs for each indication area.

RESULTS

Data were obtained from 66 new drugs and 144 pivotal clinical trials. All cardiovascular approvals (12 drugs, 29 trials) and neurologic approvals (26 drugs, 54 trials) were analyzed, as well as a random sample of cancer approvals (28 of 85 drugs [33%]) matched to their pivotal trials (61 of 210 trials [29%]). Among the trials, 56% in cancer, 79% in cardiovascular disease, and 56% in neurology recruited from an LMIC. For multicountry trials, country-level enrollment figures were not available for 71 trials (55%). For those reporting per country enrollment, the percentage of participants recruited from LMICs was 8% for cancer trials, 36% for cardiovascular trials, and 17% for neurology trials.

LIMITATIONS

The study was limited to FDA-approved drugs in 3 areas, including a sample of cancer drugs. Pivotal trials of nonapproved drugs or drugs for other indications were not captured.

CONCLUSION

Most pivotal trials for FDA-approved drugs recruit from LMICs. Publications and FDA documents generally do not provide country-level data on recruitment.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

None.

Common misconceptions of randomized controlled trials in oncology

In biomedicine, randomized controlled trials are regarded as the gold standard of evidence owing to their ability to minimize confounding factors that may influence results. Randomized trials that are properly designed serve as a basis for drug regulation and national guideline development. Despite the many advantages of the study design, there are several misconceptions regarding randomized trials, particularly in oncology. These misconceptions include: the difficulty of designing and conducting a trial, the length of time necessary to complete a trial, the expense, appraisal and critique, pharmaceutical industry influence, and ethical standards. Furthermore, developing regulatory and strategic frameworks has the potential to enhance the randomized trial landscape. Such initiatives will focus on relevant clinical issues that persist in oncology, reducing duplicative and unethical trials and maximizing value-based healthcare. Here, we address several misconceptions regarding randomized controlled trials and provide potential solutions to enhance their methodology and implementation.

Emulation of the control cohort of a randomized controlled trial in pediatric kidney transplantation with Real-World Data from the CERTAIN Registry

BACKGROUND

Randomized controlled trials in pediatric kidney transplantation are hampered by low incidence and prevalence of kidney failure in children. Real-World Data from patient registries could facilitate the conduct of clinical trials by substituting a control cohort. However, the emulation of a control cohort by registry data in pediatric kidney transplantation has not been investigated so far.

METHODS

In this multicenter comparative analysis, we emulated the control cohort (n = 54) of an RCT in pediatric kidney transplant patients (CRADLE trial; ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01544491) with data derived from the Cooperative European Paediatric Renal Transplant Initiative (CERTAIN) registry, using the same inclusion and exclusion criteria (CERTAIN cohort, n = 554).

RESULTS

Most baseline patient and transplant characteristics were well comparable between both cohorts. At year 1 posttransplant, a composite efficacy failure end point comprising biopsy-proven acute rejection, graft loss or death (5.8% ± 3.3% vs. 7.5% ± 1.1%, P = 0.33), and kidney function (72.5 ± 24.9 vs. 77.3 ± 24.2 mL/min/1.73 m² P = 0.19) did not differ significantly between CRADLE and CERTAIN. Furthermore, the incidence and severity of BPAR (5.6% vs. 7.8%), the degree of proteinuria (20.2 ± 13.9 vs. 30.6 ± 58.4 g/mol, P = 0.15), and the key safety parameters such as occurrence of urinary tract infections (24.1% vs. 15.5%, P = 0.10) were well comparable.

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, usage of Real-World Data from patient registries such as CERTAIN to emulate the control cohort of an RCT is feasible and could facilitate the conduct of clinical trials in pediatric kidney transplantation. A higher resolution version of the Graphical abstract is available as Supplementary information.

The Impact of Senior Author Profile on Publication Level of Evidence in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery

Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery (PRS) incorporated the level of evidence (LOE) pyramid in 2011 to highlight evidence-based medicine in plastic surgery. This study aimed to assess the relationship between the profile of senior authors publishing in PRS and the LOE of publications.

Randomised controlled trials in women's health in the last two decades: A meta-review

OBJECTIVES

Obstetric and gynaecological conditions represent a significant burden of disease, requiring clinical research. We aimed to study trends in the publication of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in women's health over the last two decades. The primary objective was to describe longitudinal trends in the geographical distribution of RCTs in obstetrics and gynaecology. We also described trends in trial funding, publication sources and separately published trial protocols.

STUDY DESIGN

RCTs were identified by searching the Web of Science alone, due to the large number of results and descriptive nature of analyses. Using the filter tool, only studies labelled as "Clinical trial" or "Article" were included; all other document types were excluded. Trial protocols were identified and analysed separately. Indexing data were extracted using the Web of Science selection tools. As we aimed simply to describe research trends using a single platform, we did not check for duplicates. No process for data pooling was necessary. Correlation of GDP, funding and number of RCTs was calculated using Pearson's r test.

RESULTS

We identified 39,071 RCTs. The number of annual publications globally increased from 1,406 in 2001 to 1,979 in 2020. The US (n = 12,479) and the UK (n = 3,745) were responsible for the most RCTs, followed by Italy (n = 2,676) and China (n = 2,338). The largest percentage increase in annual publications was seen in Iran (n = 5 to n = 113, +2,160 %) and the Western Pacific Region (n = 16 to n = 171, +968.8 %). GDP was significantly correlated with the number of published RCTs in 2019 for the 25 most prolific countries (p < 0.001), but not with the proportion of RCTs funded.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite growing contributions from the Western Pacific and Eastern Mediterranean regions, most RCTs are still produced in a small nucleus of high-income countries. Increased international collaboration may benefit both high- and low-income countries.

Practical guidance for planning resources required to support publicly-funded adaptive clinical trials

Adaptive designs are a class of methods for improving efficiency and patient benefit of clinical trials. Although their use has increased in recent years, research suggests they are not used in many situations where they have potential to bring benefit. One barrier to their more widespread use is a lack of understanding about how the choice to use an adaptive design, rather than a traditional design, affects resources (staff and non-staff) required to set-up, conduct and report a trial. The Costing Adaptive Trials project investigated this issue using quantitative and qualitative research amongst UK Clinical Trials Units. Here, we present guidance that is informed by our research, on considering the appropriate resourcing of adaptive trials. We outline a five-step process to estimate the resources required and provide an accompanying costing tool. The process involves understanding the tasks required to undertake a trial, and how the adaptive design affects them. We identify barriers in the publicly funded landscape and provide recommendations to trial funders that would address them. Although our guidance and recommendations are most relevant to UK non-commercial trials, many aspects are relevant more widely.

Approaches to multiplicity in publicly funded pragmatic randomised controlled trials: a survey of clinical trials units and a rapid review of published trials

Background

Opinions and practices vary around the issue of performing multiple statistical tests in randomised controlled trials (RCTs). We carried out a study to collate information about opinions and practices using a methodological rapid review and a survey, specifically of publicly funded pragmatic RCTs that are not seeking marketing authorisation. The aim was to identify the circumstances under which researchers would make a statistical adjustment for multiplicity.

Methods

A review was performed extracting information from articles reporting primary analyses of pragmatic RCTs in one of seven high quality medical journals, in January to June (inclusive) 2018. A survey (Survey Monkey) eliciting opinions and practices around multiplicity was distributed to the 47 registered clinical trials units (CTUs) in the UK.

Results

One hundred and thirty-eight RCTs were included in the review, and survey responses were received from 27/47 (57%) CTUs. Both the review and survey indicated that adjusting for multiplicity was considered most important for multiple treatment comparisons; adjustment was performed for 11/23 (48%) published trials, and 24/27 (89%) CTU statisticians reported they would consider adjustment. Opinions and practices varied around adjustment for multiplicity arising from multiple primary outcomes and interim analyses. Adjustment was considered less important for multiplicity due to multiple secondary outcomes (adjustment performed for 17/136 [13%] published trials and 3/27 [11%] CTU statisticians would consider adjustment) and subgroup analyses (8/85 [9%] published trials adjusted and 6/27 CTU [22%] statisticians would consider adjustment).

Conclusions

There is variation in opinions about adjustment for multiplicity among both statisticians reporting RCTs and applied statisticians working in CTUs. Further guidance is needed on the circumstances in which adjustment should be considered in relation to primary trial hypotheses, and if there are any situations in which adjustment would be recommended in the context of secondary analyses.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12874-022-01525-9.

Behavioural Interventions in People with Oropharyngeal Dysphagia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomised Clinical Trials

Objective: To determine the effects of behavioural interventions in people with oropharyngeal dysphagia. Methods: Systematic literature searches were conducted to retrieve randomized controlled trials in four different databases (CINAHL, Embase, PsycINFO, and PubMed). The methodological quality of eligible articles was assessed using the Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomised trials (RoB 2), after which meta-analyses were performed using a random-effects model. Results: A total of 37 studies were included. Overall, a significant, large pre-post interventions effect size was found. To compare different types of interventions, all behavioural interventions and conventional dysphagia treatment comparison groups were categorised into compensatory, rehabilitative, and combined compensatory and rehabilitative interventions. Overall, significant treatment effects were identified favouring behavioural interventions. In particular, large effect sizes were found when comparing rehabilitative interventions with no dysphagia treatment, and combined interventions with compensatory conventional dysphagia treatment. When comparing selected interventions versus conventional dysphagia treatment, significant, large effect sizes were found in favour of Shaker exercise, chin tuck against resistance exercise, and expiratory muscle strength training. Conclusions: Behavioural interventions show promising effects in people with oropharyngeal dysphagia. However, due to high heterogeneity between studies, generalisations of meta-analyses need to be interpreted with care.

Is there resource wastage in the research for spinal diseases? An observational analysis of discontinuation and non-publication in randomised controlled trials

Introduction

The scale of waste in research funding systems is large and detrimental to research capacity. Both incompleteness and non-publication of Randomised Controlled Trials (RCTs) have been increasingly reported in the literature. This is a serious consequence as RCTs demand monumental amounts of healthcare resources leading to wastage. Most importantly, both under-reporting and non-publication can distort the evidence landscape and obscure rationale behind clinical decisions.

Research question

We, therefore, aimed at conducting the first systematic assessment of registered trial discontinuation and non-publication in the field of spinal disorders.

Material and methods

A list of RCTs was obtained from the U.S National Library of Medicine ClinicalTrials.gov database from January 1st, 2013, to December 31st, 2020. Two independent authors excluded all non-RCTs, trials unrelated to spinal diseases, and trials that are in or before the recruitment phase. We extracted the progress status, sources of funding, the number of centres, type of intervention, principal investigator's department affiliation, publication status, location, the reason for discontinuation, publication date, and subtopics.

Results

112 trials were included in the study. 25 (22%) trials were discontinued early, with slow recruitment being the major reason (38%). Only 56 (50%) of the trials were published in peer-reviewed journals. The publication rate amongst discontinued trials was significantly lower compared to completed trials (P ​< ​0·001). The trial discontinuation rate was much higher in trials registered in the United States (US) compared to other countries (P ​= ​0·009). Industry-sponsored studies had 11 trials (23·4%) that were discontinued whilst there was 20% of non-industry-sponsored studies that were unfinished. Only 20% of the trials were compliant with the FDA reporting requirements over the study period.

Discussion and conclusion

Nearly a quarter of all trials in spinal disorders were discontinued. Half of the trials were unpublished. There was over a third of trials that were completed but not published. These rates remain worrisome from an ethical and financial perspective. Both under-reporting and non-publication adversely affect efforts in evidence synthesis and can compromise clinical guideline development.

•

Nearly a quarter of all trials in spinal disorders were discontinued early.

•

Only half of the trials were published in peer-reviewed journals.

•

Over a third of the trials were completed but not published.

•

The rates of trial discontinuation and non-publication are worrisome from an ethical and financial perspective.

•

Both under-reporting and non-publication adversely affect efforts in evidence synthesis and can compromise clinical guideline development.

Using the Barthel Index and modified Rankin Scale as Outcome Measures for Stroke Rehabilitation Trials; A Comparison of Minimum Sample Size Requirements

OBJECTIVES

Underpowered trials risk inaccurate results. Recruitment to stroke rehabilitation randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is often a challenge. Statistical simulations offer an important opportunity to explore the adequacy of sample sizes in the context of specific outcome measures. We aimed to examine and compare the adequacy of stroke rehabilitation RCT sample sizes using the Barthel Index (BI) or modified Rankin Scale (mRS) as primary outcomes.

METHODS

We conducted computer simulations using typical experimental event rates (EER) and control event rates (CER) based on individual participant data (IPD) from stroke rehabilitation RCTs. Event rates are the proportion of participants who experienced clinically relevant improvements in the RCT experimental and control groups. We examined minimum sample size requirements and estimated the number of participants required to achieve a number needed to treat within clinically acceptable boundaries for the BI and mRS.

RESULTS

We secured 2350 IPD (18 RCTs). For a 90% chance of statistical accuracy on the BI a rehabilitation RCT would require 273 participants per randomised group. Accurate interpretation of effect sizes would require 1000s of participants per group. Simulations for the mRS were not possible as a clinically relevant improvement was not detected when using this outcome measure.

CONCLUSIONS

Stroke rehabilitation RCTs with large sample sizes are required for accurate interpretation of effect sizes based on the BI. The mRS lacked sensitivity to detect change and thus may be unsuitable as a primary outcome in stroke rehabilitation trials.

Costs and staffing resource requirements for adaptive clinical trials: quantitative and qualitative results from the Costing Adaptive Trials project

BACKGROUND

Adaptive designs offer great promise in improving the efficiency and patient-benefit of clinical trials. An important barrier to further increased use is a lack of understanding about which additional resources are required to conduct a high-quality adaptive clinical trial, compared to a traditional fixed design. The Costing Adaptive Trials (CAT) project investigated which additional resources may be required to support adaptive trials.

METHODS

We conducted a mock costing exercise amongst seven Clinical Trials Units (CTUs) in the UK. Five scenarios were developed, derived from funded clinical trials, where a non-adaptive version and an adaptive version were described. Each scenario represented a different type of adaptive design. CTU staff were asked to provide the costs and staff time they estimated would be needed to support the trial, categorised into specified areas (e.g. statistics, data management, trial management). This was calculated separately for the non-adaptive and adaptive version of the trial, allowing paired comparisons. Interviews with 10 CTU staff who had completed the costing exercise were conducted by qualitative researchers to explore reasons for similarities and differences.

RESULTS

Estimated resources associated with conducting an adaptive trial were always (moderately) higher than for the non-adaptive equivalent. The median increase was between 2 and 4% for all scenarios, except for sample size re-estimation which was 26.5% (as the adaptive design could lead to a lengthened study period). The highest increase was for statistical staff, with lower increases for data management and trial management staff. The percentage increase in resources varied across different CTUs. The interviews identified possible explanations for differences, including (1) experience in adaptive trials, (2) the complexity of the non-adaptive and adaptive design, and (3) the extent of non-trial specific core infrastructure funding the CTU had.

CONCLUSIONS

This work sheds light on additional resources required to adequately support a high-quality adaptive trial. The percentage increase in costs for supporting an adaptive trial was generally modest and should not be a barrier to adaptive designs being cost-effective to use in practice. Informed by the results of this research, guidance for investigators and funders will be developed on appropriately resourcing adaptive trials.

Costing a population health management approach for participant recruitment to a diabetes prevention study

Limited research has reported the economic feasibility-from both a research and practice perspective-of efforts to recruit and enroll an intended audience in evidence-based approaches for disease prevention. We aimed to retrospectively assess and estimate the costs of a population health management (PHM) approach to identify, engage, and enroll patients in a Type 1 Hybrid Effectiveness-Implementation (HEI), diabetes-prevention trial. We used activity-based costing to estimate the recruitment costs of a PHM approach integrated within an HEI trial. We took the perspective of a healthcare system that may adopt, and possibly sustain, the strategy in the typical practice. We also estimated replication costs based on how the strategy could be applied in healthcare systems interested in referring patients to a local diabetes prevention program from a payer perspective. The total recruitment and enrollment costs were $360,424 to accrue 599 participants over approximately 15 months. The average cost per screened and enrolled participant was $263 and $620, respectively. Translating to the typical settings, total recruitment costs for replication were estimated as $193,971 (range: $43,827-$210,721). Sensitivity and scenario analysis results indicated replication costs would be approximately $283-$444 per patient enrolled if glucose testing was necessary, based on the Medicare-covered services. From a private payer perspective, and without glucose testing, per-participant assessed costs were estimated at $31. A PHM approach can be used to accrue a large number of participants in a short period of time for an HEI trial, at a comparable cost per participant.

A trial platform to assess approved SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in immunocompromised patients: first sub-protocol for a pilot trial comparing the mRNA vaccines Comirnaty® and COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine Moderna®

BACKGROUND

Late 2019, a new highly contagious coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 has emerged in Wuhan, China, causing within 2 months a pandemic with the highest disease burden in elderly and people with pre-existing medical conditions. The pandemic has highlighted that new and more flexible clinical trial approaches, such as trial platforms, are needed to assess the efficacy and safety of interventions in a timely manner. The two existing Swiss cohorts of immunocompromised patients (i.e., Swiss HIV Cohort Study (SHCS) and Swiss Transplant Cohort Study (STCS)) are an ideal foundation to set-up a trial platform in Switzerland leveraging routinely collected data. Within a newly founded trial platform, we plan to assess the efficacy of the first two mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccines that reached market authorization in Switzerland in the frame of a pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT) while at the same time assessing the functionality of the trial platform.

METHODS

We will conduct a multicenter randomized controlled, open-label, 2-arm sub-study pilot trial of a platform trial nested into two Swiss cohorts. Patients included in the SHCS or the STCS will be eligible for randomization to either receiving the mRNA vaccine Comirnaty® (Pfizer/BioNTech) or the COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine Moderna®. The primary clinical outcome will be change in pan-lg antibody response (pan-Ig anti-S1-RBD; baseline vs. 3 months after first vaccination; binary outcome, considering ≥ 0.8 units/ml as a positive antibody response). The pilot study will also enable us to assess endpoints related to trial conduct feasibility (i.e., duration of RCT set-up; time of patient recruitment; patient consent rate; proportion of missing data). Assuming vaccine reactivity of 90% in both vaccine groups, we power our trial, using a non-inferiority margin such that a 95% two-sided confidence interval excludes a difference in favor of the reference group of more than 10%. A sample size of 380 (190 in each treatment arm) is required for a statistical power of 90% and a type I error of 0.025. The study is funded by the Swiss National Science Foundation (National Research Program NRP 78, "COVID-19").

DISCUSSION

This study will provide crucial information about the efficacy and safety of the mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in HIV patients and organ transplant recipients. Furthermore, this project has the potential to pave the way for further platform trials in Switzerland.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04805125 . Registered on March 18, 2021.

Locating Organizations and Their Methods in Registrations of Clinical Migraine Trials: Analysis of ClinicalTrials.gov

Background and Objective:ClinicalTrials.gov is a centralized venue for monitoring clinical research and allows access to information on publicly and privately funded studies. To better recognize influential institutions in the field of headache, we identified major organizations conducting clinical trials in migraine research. Furthermore, we examined the frequency of different study designs.

Methods: Utilizing the ClinicalTrials.gov application programming interface, we extracted studies including individuals with migraine from February 29, 2000, to July 28, 2020, for the following: (1) host organization, (2) study type, (3) primary purpose, (4) intervention model, and (5) allocation.

Results: We included 921 entries encompassing 423 organizations. Thirty-two organizations produced ≥5 entries each and 40.0% of all entries. Most, 86%, were interventional studies while 13.6% were observational studies. The most common study design had a randomized allocation of participants. The most frequent primary purpose was treatment (62.4%) followed by prevention (13.0%). There were 56.9% parallel assignment models, 15.2% single group assignment models, and 12.4% crossover assignment models.

Conclusion: A minority of organizations contribute to a significant number of registrations of clinical migraine trials, suggesting that clinical research in migraine is oligarchic. The most common study is interventional and randomized, with parallel assignment of participants with treatment as the primary purpose. This likely reflects the need to evaluate novel putative pharmacological medications.

Programmatic Costs of the Telehealth Ostomy Self-Management Training: An Application of Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing

OBJECTIVES

Programmatic cost assessment of novel clinical interventions can inform their widespread dissemination and implementation. This study aimed to determine the programmatic costs of a telehealth Ostomy Self-Management Training (OSMT) intervention for cancer survivors using Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing (TDABC) methodology.

METHODS

We demonstrated a step-by-step application of TDABC based on a process map with core OSMT intervention activities and associated procedures and determined resource use and costs, per unit procedure. We also assessed per-patient costs from a payer perspective and provided estimates of total hours and costs by personnel, activity, and procedure.

RESULTS

The per-patient cost of the OSMT was $1758. Personnel time accounted for 91% of the total cost. Site supervisor and information technology technician time were the most expensive personnel resources. Telehealth technical and communication equipment accounted for 8% of the total cost. Intervention coordination and monitoring efforts represented most of the total time cost (62%), followed by the intervention delivery (35%). The procedures with the highest cost were communication via phone or virtual meetings (24%), email exchanges (18%), and telehealth session delivery (18%).

CONCLUSIONS

Future efforts to replicate, disseminate, and implement the OSMT intervention should anticipate funding for nonclinical components of the intervention, including coordination and monitoring, and consider how these activities can be performed most efficiently. For institutions without established telemedicine programs, selection of videoconferencing platforms and adequate staffing for participant technical support should be considered. Our step-by-step application of TDABC serves as a case study demonstrating how interventionists can gather data on resource use and costs of intervention activities concurrently with their collection of trial data.

Endoscopic Procedures for Weight Loss

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To provide updated evidence on the endoscopic procedures for weight loss and to bring personal insights on the future of endobariatrics.

RECENT FINDINGS

Intragastric balloons promote significant improvement in histologic and radiologic aspects of non-alcoholic steatohepatitis; the endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty is effective up to 5 years and seems particularly beneficial to patients with BMI≤40kg/m²; distal POSE is a promising technique but still lacks adequate clinical data; aspiration therapy triggers remarkable weight loss, but data on weight trends after removal of the device are still lacking; the satiety-inducing device, the sleeveballoon, the gastric mucosal devitalization, and the endoscopic magnetic partial jejunal diversion are promising procedures still under study and refinements. Several therapeutic options are necessary during obesity's natural history. Therefore, endobariatrics should act in harmony with lifestyle interventions, diet modification, psychological treatment, pharmacotherapy, and bariatric surgery seeking the best outcome in the long term.

Recruitment and enrollment of participants in an online diabetes self-management intervention in a virtual environment

Effective recruitment of research participants is essential for successful randomized controlled trials and remains one of the most challenging and labor-intensive aspects of conducting research. The purpose of this manuscript is to describe recruitment methods for this two-group, internet-based intervention trial and enrollment status in relation to recruitment methods, accounting for accrual rates and recruitment costs and to discuss our recruitment results and limitations informed by the Clinical Trials Transformation Initiative (CTTI) team's evidence and expert-based recommendations for recruitment. The primary study was a two-group randomized controlled trial designed to evaluate the efficacy of a virtual environment, Diabetes LIVE©, compared to a traditional website format to provide diabetes self-management education and support to adults with type 2 diabetes. Our recruitment experience was labor-intensive, multimodal, and required multiple iterations throughout the study to meet recruitment goals. To allow for more efficient and realistic budgets aligned with funding, researchers should engage stakeholders in recruitment planning and monitor and report personnel time and cost by recruitment methods. To allow for more efficient and effective recruitment into meaningful clinical trials and of interest to participants, researchers should use a participative approach during all study phases, including question development.

Are randomized controlled trials in urology being conducted with justification?

CONTEXT

Considering the substantial increase in research funding in the field of urology, minimizing research waste should be a top priority. Systematic reviews (SRs) compile available evidence regarding a clinical question into a single critical resource. If properly utilized, SRs can help minimize redundant studies, focus attention to unsubstantiated treatments, and reduce research waste.

OBJECTIVES

To appraise the use of SRs as justification for conducting randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in high impact urology journals, and to report the ways SRs were incorporated into RCT manuscripts published in the top four urology journals by h5 index.

METHODS

On December 13, 2019, a PubMed search was conducted for RCTs published in the top four urology journals according to the Google Scholar h5-index: European Urology, BJU International, The Journal of Urology, and Urology. For an article to be eligible for inclusion in this study, it must have been a full length RCT, published between November 30, 2014, and November 30, 2019 in one of the identified journals, reported only human subjects, and been accessible in English. The following data points were extracted independently by select investigators from each included RCT: manuscript title, year of publication, journal title, type of intervention (drug, medical device, procedure, other), funding source (government, hospital/university, industry, mixed) type of trial (parallel groups, crossover, cluster), and total number of participants reported in each RCT. The included RCTs were searched for reference to an SR, which was then recorded as "yes - verbatim," "yes - inferred," or "not used as justification" and the location in the manuscript where the SR was cited was recorded.

RESULTS

Of the 566 articles retrieved, 276 were included. Overall, 150 (54.3%) RCTs cited an SR as either verbatim (108; 39.1%) or inferred (42; 15.2%) trial justification, while 126 (45.7%) did not use an SR for RCT justification. Of those 126, 107 (84.9%) RCTs did not cite an SR to any extent. A significant association was noted between verbatim justification and type of intervention (x ²=20.23, p=0.017), with 18 of 31 (58.1%) "other" interventions (i.e. psychosocial intervention, exercise programs, and online therapy) having an SR cited as verbatim justification. Only 39 of 118 (33.1%) pharmaceutical trials referenced an SR as verbatim justification. Of 403 systematic review citations, 205 (50.8%) appeared in the Discussion section, while 15 (3.7%) were in the Methods section.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that RCTs published in four high impact urology journals inconsistently referenced an SR as justification and 39.1% of our entire sample did not reference an SR at all. These findings indicate that a divide exists between the instruction and implementation of evidence based medicine in the field of urology concerning RCTs published in the top four journals. Educating clinicians and researchers on the use of SR as justification for RCTs in urology may reduce research waste and increase the quality of RCTs in the field.

Time distribution for pharmacists conducting a randomized controlled trial-An observational time and motion study

Introduction

An expected future increase in older adults will demand changes in health care delivery, making development, implementation and evaluation of new health care models essential. The rationale for political decision-making concerning the implementation and application of interventions in health care should include cost estimations, specifically those involving clinical interventions. To provide such data knowledge of time spent on the intervention is imperative. Time and motion methodology is suitable to quantify health care personnel’s time distribution.

Aim

To investigate the time distribution for pharmacists conducting a randomized controlled trial (RCT) implementing a clinical intervention.

Materials and methods

The setting was an RCT with a 5-step pharmacist-intervention in collaboration with the interdisciplinary team in a geriatric ward. Two pharmacists were involved in the trial during the observation period. Pharmacist activities, classified as RCT-tasks (intervention or administrative), non-RCT tasks and social/breaks, were recorded applying the Work Observation Method By Activity Timing methodology, enabling recording of predefined work tasks as well as interruptions and multitasking. One observer collected data over eight weeks.

Results

In total, 109.1 hours were observed resulting in 110.2 hours total task time, including multitasking. RCT tasks comprised 85.4% of the total observed time, and nearly 60% of the RCT time was spent on intervention tasks. Medication reviews was the most time consuming task, accounting for 32% of the observed time. The clinical pharmacists spent 14% of the intervention time communicating verbally, mainly with patients and healthcare professionals.

Conclusion

During the RCT, the clinical pharmacists spent about half their time performing the actual intervention. Consequently, costs for providing such a clinical pharmacist service should reflect actual time spent; otherwise, we may risk overestimating theoretical costs.

Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials in Australian Nursing Homes from 2000 to 2018

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

High-quality research provides an evidence base for optimal practice care in clinical settings, yet, little is known about the nature and extent of randomized control trials (RCTs) conducted in Australian nursing homes (NHs). Research from other settings and other countries is not necessarily transferable to the Australian NH sector. We sought to identify and describe RCTs conducted in Australia which investigated interventions targeted at improving care for NH residents.

DESIGN

The design of this study comprised a systematic literature search with a narrative review. Studies were included if they were RCTs published after 2000, conducted in an Australian NH, and evaluated a health intervention which may have directly or indirectly benefitted the NH resident.

SETTING

Australian NHs.

PARTICIPANTS

Nursing home residents.

MEASUREMENTS

Jurisdiction (state or territory where the study was conducted), number of NHs recruited in each trial, number of residents included in each trial, intervention characteristics, comparator characteristics, and characteristics of outcome.

RESULTS

Only 43 articles reporting on 39 RCTs were identified. In contrast, 30 Australian musculoskeletal RCTs were published in just 2 years (2011-2012). Most of the RCTs identified were conducted in New South Wales (n = 14), Queensland (n = 10), and Victoria (n = 9). The mean number of NHs included in each trial was 22.4 (standard deviation (SD) = 27.0), with a median of 14.5 (interquartile range (IQR) = 27.8), while the mean number of residents included was 412.4 (SD = 921) with a median of 187 (IQR = 341.0). The most common interventions targeted: managing dementia (n = 20), prevention of falls (n = 7), and addressing mental health issues (n = 6).

CONCLUSION

This review provides evidence of the paucity of high-quality research in the form of RCTs, in the Australian NH setting and demonstrates the need for Australia to improve its research capability in the NH sector.

Coronary Artery Calcium to Improve the Efficiency of Randomized Controlled Trials in Primary Cardiovascular Prevention

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to assess the value, in terms of sample size and cost, of using the coronary artery calcium (CAC) score to enrich the study population of primary prevention randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with participants at high absolute risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) events.

BACKGROUND

The feasibility of RCTs assessing the efficacy of novel add-on therapies for primary prevention among high-risk individuals treated with statins may be limited by sample size and cost.

METHODS

We evaluated 3,075 statin-naive participants from the MESA (Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis) with estimated 10-year ASCVD risk of ≥7.5%. CAC of >100, CAC of >400, high sensitivity C-reactive protein levels of >2 and >3 mg/l, ankle-brachial index of <0.9, and triglyceride levels of >175 mg/dl were each evaluated as enrichment criteria on top of estimated ASCVD risk of ≥7.5%, ≥10%, ≥15% and ≥20%. For each criterion, using the observed 5-year incidence of CVD, we projected the incidence of CVD assuming a 28% relative risk reduction with high-intensity statin therapy and after addition of novel therapy with additive relative risk reductions of 15% and 25%. Sample size and cost of a hypothetical primary prevention 5-year RCT of a novel therapy on top of statins versus statins alone were then computed by using the projected incidences. Yearly costs per included participant of $6,000 to $9,000 and of $500/$600 per screened nonparticipant were assumed.

RESULTS

CAC of >400, present in 15% to 23% participants, consistently identified the subgroups with highest 5-year incident events and outperformed the other features yielding the smallest projected sample size, ranging 33% to 58% lower than using risk estimations alone for participant selection. CAC of >400 also yielded the lowest projected RCT costs, at least $40 million lower than using risk estimations alone. CAC of >100 showed the second-best performance in most scenarios.

CONCLUSIONS

High CAC scores used as study entry criteria can improve the efficiency and feasibility of primary prevention RCTs evaluating the incremental efficacy of novel add-on therapies.