Efficient design of clinical trials and epidemiological research: is it possible?

Development of a conceptual framework for defining trial efficiency

BACKGROUND

Globally, there is a growing focus on efficient trials, yet numerous interpretations have emerged, suggesting a significant heterogeneity in understanding "efficiency" within the trial context. Therefore in this study, we aimed to dissect the multifaceted nature of trial efficiency by establishing a comprehensive conceptual framework for its definition.

OBJECTIVES

To collate diverse perspectives regarding trial efficiency and to achieve consensus on a conceptual framework for defining trial efficiency.

METHODS

From July 2022 to July 2023, we undertook a literature review to identify various terms that have been used to define trial efficiency. We then conducted a modified e-Delphi study, comprising an exploratory open round and a subsequent scoring round to refine and validate the identified items. We recruited a wide range of experts in the global trial community including trialists, funders, sponsors, journal editors and members of the public. Consensus was defined as items rated "without disagreement", measured by the inter-percentile range adjusted for symmetry through the UCLA/RAND approach.

RESULTS

Seventy-eight studies were identified from a literature review, from which we extracted nine terms related to trial efficiency. We then used review findings as exemplars in the Delphi open round. Forty-nine international experts were recruited to the e-Delphi panel. Open round responses resulted in the refinement of the initial nine terms, which were consequently included in the scoring round. We obtained consensus on all nine items: 1) four constructs that collectively define trial efficiency containing scientific efficiency, operational efficiency, statistical efficiency and economic efficiency; and 2) five essential building blocks for efficient trial comprising trial design, trial process, infrastructure, superstructure, and stakeholders.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first attempt to dissect the concept of trial efficiency into theoretical constructs. Having an agreed definition will allow better trial implementation and facilitate effective communication and decision-making across stakeholders. We also identified essential building blocks that are the cornerstones of an efficient trial. In this pursuit of understanding, we are not only unravelling the complexities of trial efficiency but also laying the groundwork for evaluating the efficiency of an individual trial or a trial system in the future.

Clinical data mining: challenges, opportunities, and recommendations for translational applications

Clinical data mining of predictive models offers significant advantages for re-evaluating and leveraging large amounts of complex clinical real-world data and experimental comparison data for tasks such as risk stratification, diagnosis, classification, and survival prediction. However, its translational application is still limited. One challenge is that the proposed clinical requirements and data mining are not synchronized. Additionally, the exotic predictions of data mining are difficult to apply directly in local medical institutions. Hence, it is necessary to incisively review the translational application of clinical data mining, providing an analytical workflow for developing and validating prediction models to ensure the scientific validity of analytic workflows in response to clinical questions. This review systematically revisits the purpose, process, and principles of clinical data mining and discusses the key causes contributing to the detachment from practice and the misuse of model verification in developing predictive models for research. Based on this, we propose a niche-targeting framework of four principles: Clinical Contextual, Subgroup-Oriented, Confounder- and False Positive-Controlled (CSCF), to provide guidance for clinical data mining prior to the model's development in clinical settings. Eventually, it is hoped that this review can help guide future research and develop personalized predictive models to achieve the goal of discovering subgroups with varied remedial benefits or risks and ensuring that precision medicine can deliver its full potential.

Long-term health outcomes for patients with obstructive sleep apnea: placing the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality report in context-a multisociety commentary

This multisociety commentary critically examines the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) final report and systematic review on long-term health outcomes in obstructive sleep apnea. The AHRQ report was commissioned by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services and particularly focused on the long-term patient-centered outcomes of continuous positive airway pressure, the variability of sleep-disordered breathing metrics, and the validity of these metrics as surrogate outcomes. This commentary raises concerns regarding the AHRQ report conclusions and their potential implications for policy decisions. A major concern expressed in this commentary is that the AHRQ report inadequately acknowledges the benefits of continuous positive airway pressure for several established, long-term clinically important outcomes including excessive sleepiness, motor vehicle accidents, and blood pressure. While acknowledging the limited evidence for the long-term benefits of continuous positive airway pressure treatment, especially cardiovascular outcomes, as summarized by the AHRQ report, this commentary reviews the limitations of recent randomized controlled trials and nonrandomized controlled studies and the challenges of conducting future randomized controlled trials. A research agenda to address these challenges is proposed including study designs that may include both high quality randomized controlled trials and nonrandomized controlled studies. This commentary concludes by highlighting implications for the safety and quality of life for the millions of people living with obstructive sleep apnea if the AHRQ report alone was used by payers to limit coverage for the treatment of obstructive sleep apnea while not considering the totality of available evidence.

CITATION

Patil SP, Billings ME, Bourjeily G, et al. Long-term health outcomes for patients with obstructive sleep apnea: placing the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality report in context-a multisociety commentary. J Clin Sleep Med. 2024;20(1):135-149.

Unmasking Heterogeneity of Sleep Apnea

Sleep apnea is heterogeneous in multiple dimensions. There are different physiological risk factors that may have clinical relevance. However, assessing them is challenging. An approach to ascertain them using a simple model of ventilatory control has been proposed. It is based, however, on untenable assumptions. There are limited validation data and reproducibility is not stellar. There are also different symptom subtypes. They have been found in multiple population-based and clinical cohorts worldwide. Symptomatic benefit from therapy is most marked in the excessively sleepy subtype. This group may also be the group at increased CV risk from obstructive sleep apnea.

Recruitment Strategies of a Decentralized Randomized Placebo Controlled Clinical Trial: The Canagliflozin Impact on Health Status, Quality of Life and Functional Status in Heart Failure (CHIEF-HF) Trial

BACKGROUND

There has been growing Interest in patient-centered clinical trials using mobile technologies to reduce the need for in-person visits. The CHIEF-HF (Canagliflozin Impact on Health Status, Quality of Life and Functional Status in Heart Failure) trial was designed as a double-blind, randomized, fully decentralized clinical trial (DCT) that identified, consented, treated, and followed participants without any in-person visits. Patient-reported questionnaires were the primary outcome, which were collected by a mobile application. To inform future DCTs, we sought to describe the strategies used in successful trial recruitment.

METHODS

This article describes the operational structure and novel strategies employed in a completely DCT by summarizing the recruitment, enrollment, engagement, retention, and follow-up processes used in the execution of the trial at 18 centers.

RESULTS

A total of 18 sites contacted 130,832 potential participants, of which 2572 (2.0%) opened a hyperlink to the study website, completed a brief survey, and agreed to be contacted for potential inclusion. Of these, 1333 were eligible, and 658 consented; there were 182 screen failures, due primarily to baseline Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire scores' not meeting inclusion criteria, resulting in 476 participants' being enrolled (18.5%). There was significant site-level variation in the number of patients invited (median = 2976; range 73-46,920) and in those agreeing to be contacted (median = 2.4%; range 0.05%-16.4%). At the site with the highest enrollment, patients contacted by electronic medical record portal messaging were more likely to opt into the study successfully than those contacted by e-mail alone (7.8% vs 4.4%).

CONCLUSIONS

CHIEF-HF used a novel design and operational structure to test the efficacy of a therapeutic treatment, but marked variability across sites and strategies for recruiting participants was observed. This approach may be advantageous for clinical research across a broader range of therapeutic areas, but further optimization of recruitment efforts is warranted.

REGISTRATION

NCT04252287 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04252287.

National Institutes of Health research project grant inflation 1998 to 2021

We analyzed changes in total costs for National Institutes of Health (NIH) awarded Research Project Grants (RPGs) issued from fiscal years (FYs) 1998 to 2021 . Costs are measured in 'nominal' terms, meaning exactly as stated, or in 'real' terms, meaning after adjustment for inflation. The NIH uses a data-driven price index - the Biomedical Research and Development Price Index (BRDPI) - to account for inflation, enabling assessment of changes in real (that is, BRDPI-adjusted) costs over time. The BRDPI was higher than the general inflation rate from FY1998 until FY2012; since then the BRDPI has been similar to the general inflation rate likely due to caps on senior faculty salary support. Despite increases in nominal costs, recent years have seen increases in the absolute numbers of RPG and R01 awards. Real average and median RPG costs increased during the NIH-doubling (FY1998 to FY2003), decreased after the doubling and have remained relatively stable since. Of note, though, the degree of variation of RPG costs has changed over time, with more marked extremes observed on both higher and lower levels of cost. On both ends of the cost spectrum, the agency is funding a greater proportion of solicited projects, with nearly half of RPG money going toward solicited projects. After adjusting for confounders, we find no independent association of time with BRDPI-adjusted costs; in other words, changes in real costs are largely explained by changes in the composition of the NIH-grant portfolio.

Registry-based randomised clinical trials: a remedy for evidence-based diabetes care?

This narrative review describes a new approach to navigation in a challenging landscape of clinical drug development in diabetes. Successful outcome studies in recent years have led to new indications and guidelines in type 2 diabetes, yet the number of clinical trials in diabetes is now declining. This is due to many environmental factors acting in concert, including the prioritisation of funding for other diseases, high costs of large randomised clinical trials, increase in regulatory requirements and limited entry of novel candidate drugs. There is a need for novel and cost-effective paradigms of clinical development to meet these and other challenges. The concept of registry-based randomised clinical trials (RRCTs) is an attractive option. In this review we focus on type 2 diabetes and the prevention of cardiovascular and microvascular comorbidities and mortality, using the Swedish SMARTEST trial as an example of an RRCT. We also give some examples from other disease areas. The RRCT concept is a novel, cost-effective and scientifically sound approach for conducting large-scale diabetes trials in a real-world setting.

Women's Health Initiative Strong and Healthy (WHISH): A pragmatic physical activity intervention trial for cardiovascular disease prevention

BACKGROUND

National guidelines promote physical activity to reduce cardiovascular disease (CVD); yet, no RCT has tested the effectiveness of physical activity as the sole intervention for primary CVD prevention in older adults. The Women's Health Initiative (WHI) Strong and Healthy (WHISH) trial, a pragmatic trial embedded in the WHI-Extension Study (ES), is testing whether increasing physical activity and decreasing sedentary behavior will reduce major CV events in older women.

METHODS

The randomized consent design was used to assign 49,331 women (aged 68-99 years in 2015) who had consented to ongoing WHI-ES follow-up and for whom CV outcomes were available through WHI-ES procedures (N = 18,985) and/or linkage to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (N = 30,346) to a physical activity (PA) intervention designed to promote national recommendations (N = 24,657) or "usual activity" comparison (N = 24,674). Women assigned to the intervention provided passive consent to receive the intervention and provide data. A multi-component PA intervention is delivered by seasonal (quarterly) newsletters with targeted inserts (lower, middle, higher) based on self-reported levels of physical functioning (PF) and physical activity; monthly motivational telephone messages; monthly emails; a website; and contact with staff, as requested. Major CV events, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, or CVD death, collected annually through WHI-ES, comprise the primary outcome. Hip fracture and non-CVD death are primary safety outcomes. Intention-to-treat analyses in all randomized participants will include 8 years of follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Determining whether increased physical activity and decreased sedentary behavior reduce major CV events in older women is of major public health significance.

CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.govidentifier:NCT02425345.

Design and baseline characteristics of participants in the COcoa Supplement and Multivitamin Outcomes Study (COSMOS)

Background Cocoa extract and multivitamins have been proposed to reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and cancer, respectively. However, few randomized clinical trials have tested their long-term effects on these outcomes. Methods The COcoa Supplement and Multivitamin Outcomes Study (COSMOS) is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 2 × 2 factorial trial of a cocoa extract supplement and a multivitamin supplement to reduce the risk of CVD and cancer. Here we describe the pragmatic, hybrid design of the trial and baseline characteristics of the trial participants. Results The nationwide study population includes 21,442 U.S. women aged ≥65 years and men aged ≥60 years without baseline myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, or a recent (within the past 2 years) cancer diagnosis. Participants were randomized in a 2 × 2 factorial design to one of four groups: (1) cocoa extract (containing 500 mg/d flavanols, including 80 mg (-)-epicatechin) and a multivitamin (Centrum Silver©); (2) cocoa extract and multivitamin placebo; (3) multivitamin and cocoa extract placebo; or (4) both placebos. Randomization successfully distributed baseline demographic, clinical, behavioral, and dietary characteristics across treatment groups. Baseline biospecimens were collected from 6867 participants, with at least one follow-up biospecimen from 2142 participants. The primary outcome for the cocoa extract intervention is total CVD (a composite of MI, stroke, cardiovascular mortality, coronary revascularization, unstable angina requiring hospitalization, carotid artery surgery, and peripheral artery surgery); the primary outcome for the multivitamin intervention is total invasive cancer. Conclusion COSMOS will provide important information on the health effects of cocoa extract and multivitamin supplementation in older U.S. adults. Clinical Trials Registration: clinicaltrials.gov #NCT02422745.

The SGLT2 inhibitor canagliflozin in heart failure: the CHIEF-HF remote, patient-centered randomized trial

Large traditional clinical trials suggest that sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors improve symptoms in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and in patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). In the midst of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 pandemic, we sought to confirm these benefits in a new type of trial that was patient centered and conducted in a completely remote fashion. In the CHIEF-HF trial ( NCT04252287 ), 476 participants with HF, regardless of EF or diabetes status, were randomized to 100 mg of canagliflozin or placebo. Enrollment was stopped early due to shifting sponsor priorities, without unblinding. The primary outcome was change in the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire Total Symptom Score (KCCQ TSS) at 12 weeks. The 12-week change in KCCQ TSS was 4.3 points (95% confidence interval, 0.8-7.8; P = 0.016) higher with canagliflozin than with placebo, meeting the primary endpoint. Similar effects were observed in participants with HFpEF and in those with HFrEF and in participants with and without diabetes, demonstrating that canagliflozin significantly improves symptom burden in HF, regardless of EF or diabetes status. This randomized, double-blind trial, conducted without in-person interactions between doctor and patient, can serve as a model for future all-virtual clinical trials.

When Can We Rely on Real-World Evidence to Evaluate New Medical Treatments?

Concerns regarding both the limited generalizability and the slow pace of traditional randomized trials have led to calls for greater use of real-world evidence (RWE) in the evaluation of new treatments or products. The RWE label has been used to refer to a variety of departures from the methods of traditional randomized controlled trials. Recognizing this complexity and potential confusion, the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine convened a series of workshops to clarify and address questions regarding the use of RWE to evaluate new medical treatments. Those workshops identified three specific dimensions in which RWE studies might differ from traditional clinical trials: use of real-world data (data extracted from health system records or data captured by mobile devices), delivery of real-world treatment (open-label treatments delivered in community settings by community practitioners), and real-world treatment assignment (including nonrandomized comparisons and variations on random assignment such as before-after or stepped-wedge designs). For any RWE study, decisions regarding each of these dimensions depends on the specific research question, characteristics of the potential study settings, and characteristics of the settings where study results would be applied.

Pragmatic Clinical Studies: An Emerging Clinical Research Discipline for Improving Evidence-Based Practice of Cardiovascular Diseases in Asia

Pragmatic clinical studies, as an emerging clinical research discipline, include a wide range of studies that are largely embedded with routine clinical practice aiming to evaluate comparative effectiveness and safety of different clinical intervention strategies. In this review, we described the evolution of the conceptual framework of pragmatic clinical studies, shared perspectives on the importance of pragmatic clinical studies for cardiovascular diseases as a complement to conventional randomized controlled trials, as well as highlighted the specific importance of pragmatic clinical research in improving evidence-based practice for cardiovascular disease managements in Asia.

Pragmatic clinical studies, an emerging clinical research discipline, include a wide range of studies that are largely embedded with routine clinical practice and aim to evaluate the comparative effectiveness and safety of different clinical intervention strategies. Increased availability and quality of electronic medical/health records drives the development of pragmatic clinical studies. In this review, we describe evolution of the conceptual framework of pragmatic clinical studies and share perspectives on the importance of pragmatic clinical studies in evidence-based practice for cardiovascular diseases, as a complement to conventional randomized controlled trials. We also highlight specific needs of pragmatic clinical studies in improving evidence-based practice for cardiovascular disease in Asian countries. The main challenges of pragmatic clinical studies are discussed briefly in this review.

Zelen design clinical trials: why, when, and how

BACKGROUND

In 1979, Marvin Zelen proposed a new design for randomized clinical trials intended to facilitate clinicians' and patients' participation. The defining innovation of Zelen's proposal was random assignment of treatment prior to patient or participant consent. Following randomization, a participant would receive information and asked to consent to the assigned treatment.

METHODS

This narrative review examined recent examples of Zelen design trials evaluating clinical and public health interventions.

RESULTS

Zelen designs have often been applied to questions regarding real-world treatment or intervention effects under conditions of incomplete adherence. Examples include evaluating outreach or engagement interventions (especially for stigmatized conditions), evaluating treatments for which benefit may vary according to participant motivation, and situations when assignment to a control or usual care condition might prompt a disappointment effect. Specific practical considerations determine whether a Zelen design is scientifically appropriate or practicable. Zelen design trials usually depend on identifying participants automatically from existing records rather than by advertising, referral, or active recruitment. Assessments of baseline or prognostic characteristics usually depend on available records data rather than research-specific assessments. Because investigators must consider how exposure to treatments or interventions might bias ascertainment of outcomes, assessment of outcomes from routinely created records is often necessary. A Zelen design requires a waiver of the usual requirement for informed consent prior to random assignment of treatment. The Revised Common Rule includes specific criteria for such a waiver, and those criteria are most often met for evaluation of a low-risk and potentially beneficial intervention added to usual care. Investigators and Institutional Review Boards must also consider whether the scientific or public health benefit of a Zelen design trial outweighs the autonomy interests of potential participants. Analysis of Zelen trials compares outcomes according to original assignment, regardless of any refusal to accept or participate in the assigned treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

A Zelen design trial assesses the real-world consequences of a specific strategy to prompt or promote uptake of a specific treatment. While such trials are poorly suited to address explanatory or efficacy questions, they are often preferred for addressing pragmatic or policy questions.

When Can We Trust Real-World Data To Evaluate New Medical Treatments?

Concerns regarding both the limited generalizability and the slow pace of traditional randomized trials have led to calls for greater use of real‐world evidence (RWE) in the evaluation of new treatments or products. RWE studies often rely on real‐world data (RWD), including data extracted from healthcare records or data captured by mobile phones or other consumer devices. Global assessments of RWD sources are not helpful in assessing whether any specific RWD element is fit for any specific purpose. Instead, evidence generators and evidence consumers should clearly identify the specific health state or clinical phenomenon of interest and then consider each step between that clinical phenomenon and its representation in a research database. We propose specific questions regarding potential error or bias affecting each of those steps: Would a person experiencing this clinical phenomenon present for care in this setting or interact with this recording device? Would this clinical phenomenon be accurately recognized or assessed? How might the recording environment or tools affect accurate and consistent recording of this clinical phenomenon? Can data elements from different sources be harmonized, both technically (same format) and semantically (same meaning)? Can the original data elements be consistently reduced to a useful clinical phenotype? Addressing these questions requires a range of clinical, organizational, and technical expertise. Transparency regarding each step in the creation of RWD is essential if evidence consumers are to rely on RWE studies.

Women's Health Initiative Strong and Healthy Pragmatic Physical Activity Intervention Trial for Cardiovascular Disease Prevention: Design and Baseline Characteristics

BACKGROUND

National guidelines promote physical activity to prevent cardiovascular disease (CVD), yet no randomized controlled trial has tested whether physical activity reduces CVD.

METHODS

The Women's Health Initiative (WHI) Strong and Healthy (WHISH) pragmatic trial used a randomized consent design to assign women for whom cardiovascular outcomes were available through WHI data collection (N = 18 985) or linkage to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (N30 346), to a physical activity intervention or "usual activity" comparison, stratified by ages 68-99 years (in tertiles), U.S. geographic region, and outcomes data source. Women assigned to the intervention could "opt out" after receiving initial physical activity materials. Intervention materials applied evidence-based behavioral science principles to promote current national recommendations for older Americans. The intervention was adapted to participant input regarding preferences, resources, barriers, and motivational drivers and was targeted for 3 categories of women at lower, middle, or higher levels of self-reported physical functioning and physical activity. Physical activity was assessed in both arms through annual questionnaires. The primary outcome is major cardiovascular events, specifically myocardial infarction, stroke, or CVD death; primary safety outcomes are hip fracture and non-CVD death. The trial is monitored annually by an independent Data Safety and Monitoring Board. Final analyses will be based on intention to treat in all randomized participants, regardless of intervention engagement.

RESULTS

The 49 331 randomized participants had a mean baseline age of 79.7 years; 84.3% were White, 9.2% Black, 3.3% Hispanic, 1.9% Asian/Pacific Islander, 0.3% Native American, and 1% were of unknown race/ethnicity. The mean baseline RAND-36 physical function score was 71.6 (± 25.2 SD). There were no differences between Intervention (N = 24 657) and Control (N = 24 674) at baseline for age, race/ethnicity, current smoking (2.5%), use of blood pressure or lipid-lowering medications, body mass index, physical function, physical activity, or prior CVD (10.1%).

CONCLUSION

The WHISH trial is rigorously testing whether a physical activity intervention reduces major CV events in a large, diverse cohort of older women. Clinical Trials Registration Number: NCT02425345.

Novel Trial Design: CHIEF-HF

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

The expense of clinical trials mandates new strategies to efficiently generate evidence and test novel therapies. In this context, we designed a decentralized, patient-centered randomized clinical trial leveraging mobile technologies, rather than in-person site visits, to test the efficacy of 12 weeks of canagliflozin for the treatment of heart failure, regardless of ejection fraction or diabetes status, on the reduction of heart failure symptoms.

Using digital technologies in clinical trials: Current and future applications

In 2015, we provided an overview of the use of digital technologies in clinical trials, both as a methodological tool and as a mechanism to deliver interventions. At that time, there was limited guidance and limited use of digital technologies in clinical research. However, since then smartphones have become ubiquitous and digital health technologies have exploded. This paper provides an update to our earlier publication and an overview of how technology has been used in the past five years in clinical trials, providing examples with varying levels of technological integration and across different health conditions. Digital technology integration ranges from the incorporation of artificial intelligence in diagnostic devices to the use of real-world data (e.g., electronic health records) for study recruitment. Clinical trials can now be conducted entirely virtually, eliminating the need for in-person interaction. Much of the published research demonstrates how digital approaches can improve the design and implementation of clinical trials. While challenges remain, progress over the last five years is encouraging, and barriers can be overcome with careful planning.

Effects of Counseling by Peer Human Advisors vs Computers to Increase Walking in Underserved Populations: The COMPASS Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Effective and practical treatments are needed to increase physical activity among those at heightened risk from inactivity. Walking represents a popular physical activity that can produce a range of desirable health effects, particularly as people age.

OBJECTIVE

To test the hypothesis that counseling by a computer-based virtual advisor is no worse than (ie, noninferior to) counseling by trained human advisors for increasing 12-month walking levels among inactive adults.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A cluster-randomized, noninferiority parallel trial enrolled 245 adults between July 21, 2014, and July 29, 2016, with follow-up through September 15, 2017. Data analysis was performed from March 15 to December 20, 2018. The evidence-derived noninferiority margin was 30 minutes of walking per week. Participants included inactive adults aged 50 years and older, primarily of Latin American descent and capable of walking without significant limitations, from 10 community centers in Santa Clara and San Mateo counties, California.

INTERVENTIONS

All participants received similar evidence-based, 12-month physical activity counseling at their local community center, with the 10 centers randomized to a computerized virtual advisor program (virtual) or a previously validated peer advisor program (human).

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was change in walking minutes per week over 12 months using validated interview assessment corroborated with accelerometry. Both per-protocol and intention-to-treat analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Among the 245 participants randomized, 193 were women (78.8%) and 241 participants (98.4%) were Latino. Mean (SD) age was 62.3 (8.4) years (range, 50-87 years), 107 individuals (43.7%) had high school or less educational level, mean BMI was 32.8 (6.8), and mean years residence in the US was 47.4 (17.0) years. A total of 231 participants (94.3%) completed the study. Mean 12-month change in walking was 153.9 min/wk (95% CI, 126.3 min/wk to infinity) for the virtual cohort (n = 123) and 131.9 min/wk (95% CI, 101.4 min/wk to infinity) for the human cohort (n = 122) (difference, 22.0, with lower limit of 1-sided 95% CI, -20.6 to infinity; P = .02); this finding supports noninferiority. Improvements emerged in both arms for relevant clinical risk factors, sedentary behavior, and well-being measures.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The findings of this study indicate that a virtual advisor using evidence-based strategies produces significant 12-month walking increases for older, lower-income Latino adults that are no worse than the significant improvements achieved by human advisors. Changes produced by both programs are commensurate with those reported in previous investigations of these behavioral interventions and provide support for broadening the range of light-touch physical activity programs that can be offered to a diverse population.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02111213.

Master Protocol Trial Design for Efficient and Rational Evaluation of Novel Therapeutic Oncology Devices

Historically, the gold standard for evaluation of cancer therapeutics, including medical devices, has been the randomized clinical trial. Although high-quality clinical data are essential for safe and judicious use of therapeutic oncology devices, class II devices require only preclinical data for US Food and Drug Administration approval and are often not rigorously evaluated prior to widespread uptake. Herein, we review master protocol design in medical oncology and its application to therapeutic oncology devices, using examples from radiation oncology. Unique challenges of clinical testing of radiation oncology devices (RODs) include patient and treatment heterogeneity, lack of funding for trials by industry and health-care payers, and operator dependence. To address these challenges, we propose the use of master protocols to optimize regulatory, financial, administrative, quality assurance, and statistical efficiency of trials evaluating RODs. These device-specific master protocols can be extrapolated to other devices and encompass multiple substudies with the same design, statistical considerations, logistics, and infrastructure. As a practical example, we outline our phase I and II master protocol trial of stereotactic magnetic resonance imaging–guided adaptive radiotherapy, which to the best of our knowledge is the first master protocol trial to test a ROD. Development of more efficient clinical trials is needed to promote thorough evaluation of therapeutic oncology devices, including RODs, in a resource-limited environment, allowing more practical and rapid identification of the most valuable advances in our field.

Artificial Intelligence in Cardiology: Present and Future

Artificial intelligence (AI) is a nontechnical, popular term that refers to machine learning of various types but most often to deep neural networks. Cardiology is at the forefront of AI in medicine. For this review, we searched PubMed and MEDLINE databases with no date restriction using search terms related to AI and cardiology. Articles were selected for inclusion on the basis of relevance. We highlight the major achievements in recent years in nearly all areas of cardiology and underscore the mounting evidence suggesting how AI will take center stage in the field. Artificial intelligence requires a close collaboration among computer scientists, clinical investigators, clinicians, and other users in order to identify the most relevant problems to be solved. Best practices in the generation and implementation of AI include the selection of ideal data sources, taking into account common challenges during the interpretation, validation, and generalizability of findings, and addressing safety and ethical concerns before final implementation. The future of AI in cardiology and in medicine in general is bright as the collaboration between investigators and clinicians continues to excel.

Child Health CheckPoint: cohort summary and methodology of a physical health and biospecimen module for the Longitudinal Study of Australian Children

OBJECTIVES

'Growing Up in Australia: The Longitudinal Study of Australian Children' (LSAC) is Australia's only nationally representative children's longitudinal study, focusing on social, economic, physical and cultural impacts on health, learning, social and cognitive development. LSAC's first decade collected wide-ranging repeated psychosocial and administrative data; here, we describe the Child Health CheckPoint, LSAC's dedicated biophysical module.

DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

LSAC recruited a cross-sequential sample of 5107 infants aged 0-1 year and a sample of 4983 children aged 4-5 years in 2004, since completing seven biennial visits. CheckPoint was a cross-sectional wave that travelled Australia in 2015-2016 to reach LSAC's younger cohort at ages 11-12 years between LSAC waves 6 and 7. Parent-child pairs participated in comprehensive assessments at 15 Assessment Centres nationwide or, if unable to attend, a shorter home visit.

MEASURES

CheckPoint's intergenerational, multidimensional measures were prioritised to show meaningful variation within normal ranges and capture non-communicable disease (NCD) phenotype precursors. These included anthropometry, physical activity, fitness, time use, vision, hearing, and cardiovascular, respiratory and bone health. Biospecimens included blood, saliva, buccal swabs (also from second parent), urine, hair and toenails. The epidemiology and parent-child concordance of many measures are described in separate papers.

RESULTS

1874 (54% of eligible) parent-child pairs and 1051 second parents participated. Participants' geographical distribution mirrored the broader Australian population; however, mean socioeconomic position and parental education were higher and fewer reported non-English-speaking or Indigenous backgrounds. Application of survey weights partially mitigates that the achieved sample is less population representative than previous waves of LSAC due to non-random attrition. Completeness was uniformly high for phenotypic data (>92% of eligible), biospecimens (74%-97%) and consent (genetic analyses 98%, accessing neonatal blood spots 97%, sharing 96%).

CONCLUSIONS

CheckPoint enriches LSAC to study how NCDs develop at the molecular and phenotypic levels before overt disease emerges, and clarify the underlying dimensionality of health in childhood and mid-adulthood.

Development process of a consensus-driven CONSORT extension for randomised trials using an adaptive design

BACKGROUND

Adequate reporting of adaptive designs (ADs) maximises their potential benefits in the conduct of clinical trials. Transparent reporting can help address some obstacles and concerns relating to the use of ADs. Currently, there are deficiencies in the reporting of AD trials. To overcome this, we have developed a consensus-driven extension to the CONSORT statement for randomised trials using an AD. This paper describes the processes and methods used to develop this extension rather than detailed explanation of the guideline.

METHODS

We developed the guideline in seven overlapping stages: 1) Building on prior research to inform the need for a guideline; 2) A scoping literature review to inform future stages; 3) Drafting the first checklist version involving an External Expert Panel; 4) A two-round Delphi process involving international, multidisciplinary, and cross-sector key stakeholders; 5) A consensus meeting to advise which reporting items to retain through voting, and to discuss the structure of what to include in the supporting explanation and elaboration (E&E) document; 6) Refining and finalising the checklist; and 7) Writing-up and dissemination of the E&E document. The CONSORT Executive Group oversaw the entire development process.

RESULTS

Delphi survey response rates were 94/143 (66%), 114/156 (73%), and 79/143 (55%) in rounds 1, 2, and across both rounds, respectively. Twenty-seven delegates from Europe, the USA, and Asia attended the consensus meeting. The main checklist has seven new and nine modified items and six unchanged items with expanded E&E text to clarify further considerations for ADs. The abstract checklist has one new and one modified item together with an unchanged item with expanded E&E text. The E&E document will describe the scope of the guideline, the definition of an AD, and some types of ADs and trial adaptations and explain each reporting item in detail including case studies.

CONCLUSIONS

We hope that making the development processes, methods, and all supporting information that aided decision-making transparent will enhance the acceptability and quick uptake of the guideline. This will also help other groups when developing similar CONSORT extensions. The guideline is applicable to all randomised trials with an AD and contains minimum reporting requirements.

Exploring the surgical landscape of pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasia in Austria: Results from the ASSO pNEN study group

INTRODUCTION

Pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasia (pNEN) show increasing incidence and management is complex due to biological heterogeneity. Most publications report isolated high-volume single-centre data. This Austrian multi-centre study on surgical management of pNENs provides a comprehensive real-life picture of quality indicators, recurrence-patterns, survival factors and systemic treatments.

METHODS

Retrospective, national cohort-study from 7 medium-/high-volume centres in Austria, coordinated under the auspices of the Austrian Society of Surgical Oncology (ASSO).

RESULTS

Two-hundred patients underwent resection for pNEN, 177 had non-functioning tumours and 31 showed stage 4 disease. Participating centres were responsible for 2/3 of pNEN resections in Austria within the last years. The mean rate of completeness of variables was 98.6%. Ninety-days mortality was 3.5%, overall rate of complications was 42.5%. Morbidity did not influence long-term survival. The 5-year overall-survival (OS) was 81.3%, 10-year-OS 52.5% and 5-year recurrence-free-survival (RFS) 69.8%. Recurrence was most common in the liver (68.1%). Four out of five patients with recurrence underwent further treatment, most commonly with medical therapy or chemotherapy. Multivariable analysis revealed grading (HR:2.7) and metastasis (HR:2.5) as significant factors for relapse. Tumours-size ≥2 cm (HR:5.9), age ≥60 years (HR:3.1), metastasis (HR:2.3) and grading (HR:2.0) were associated with OS. Tumours <2 cm showed 93.9% 10-year-OS, but 33% had G2/G3 grading, 12.5% positive lymph-nodes and 4.7% metastasis at diagnosis, each associated with significant worse survival.

CONCLUSION

Resection of pNENs in Austria is performed with internationally comparable safety. Analysed factors allow for risk-stratification in clinical treatment and future prospective trials. A watch-and-wait strategy purely based on tumour-size cannot be recommended.

How to do health services research in stroke: A focus on performance measurement and quality improvement

The objective of this "How to" research series article is to provide guidance on getting started in Health Services Research. The purpose of health services research is to contribute knowledge that can be used to help improve health systems and clinical services through influencing policy and practice. The methods used are broad, have varying levels of rigor, and may require different specialist skills. This paper sets out practical steps for undertaking health services research. Importantly, use of the highlighted techniques can identify solutions to address inadequate knowledge translation or promote greater access to evidence-based stroke care to optimize patient outcomes.

Overcoming the Declining Trends in Innovation and Investment in Cardiovascular Therapeutics: Beyond EROOM's Law

Eroom's law (Moore's law spelled backwards), describes adverse trends towards declining innovation and rising costs of drug development over the last several decades. Therapeutics for cardiovascular diseases (CVD) appear to have been particularly sensitive to these trends. Thirty-three percent fewer CVD therapeutics were approved between 2000 and 2009 compared to the previous decade, and the number of CVD drugs starting all clinical trial stages declined in both absolute and relative numbers between 1990 and 2012. In the last 5 years, drugs to treat CVD disease comprised just 6% of all new drug launches. This review discusses the decline in CVD therapeutics, the reasons behind it, and ways in which this trend is being or might be addressed.