Independent Oversight of Clinical Trials through Data and Safety Monitoring Boards

Evaluating the balance of benefits and harms in chronic pain clinical trials: prioritizing individual participants over individual outcomes

BACKGROUND

Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) generally assess efficacy and safety separately, with the conclusion of whether a treatment is beneficial based solely on the efficacy endpoint. However, assessing and combining efficacy and safety domains, using a single composite outcome measure, can provide a more comprehensive assessment of the overall effect of a treatment. Furthermore, composite outcomes can incorporate information regarding the relationship between the individual outcomes. In fact, such outcomes have been suggested in the clinical trials literature for at least 15 years.

OBJECTIVES

To (1) identify whether recent primary publications of chronic pain RCTs from major pain journals included a composite outcome measure of benefits and harms and (2) discuss the potential benefits of such outcomes in various stages of treatment development, including as outcome measures in RCTs, and to support decisions of Data and Safety Monitoring Boards and ordering of treatments in the context of treatment guidelines.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

RCTs published in 6 major pain journals published between 2016 and 2021 that investigated interventions for chronic pain were reviewed.

FINDINGS

Of 73 RCTs identified, only 2 included a composite outcome measure of benefits and harms. Both of these articles compared 2 active treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

Composite outcomes of benefits and harms are underutilized in chronic pain RCTs. The advantages and challenges of using such outcomes are discussed.

Addressing neurodegeneration in glaucoma: Mechanisms, challenges, and treatments

Glaucoma is the leading cause of irreversible blindness globally. The disease causes vision loss due to neurodegeneration of the retinal ganglion cell (RGC) projection to the brain through the optic nerve. Glaucoma is associated with sensitivity to intraocular pressure (IOP). Thus, mainstay treatments seek to manage IOP, though many patients continue to lose vision. To address neurodegeneration directly, numerous preclinical studies seek to develop protective or reparative therapies that act independently of IOP. These include growth factors, compounds targeting metabolism, anti-inflammatory and antioxidant agents, and neuromodulators. Despite success in experimental models, many of these approaches fail to translate into clinical benefits. Several factors contribute to this challenge. Firstly, the anatomic structure of the optic nerve head differs between rodents, nonhuman primates, and humans. Additionally, animal models do not replicate the complex glaucoma pathophysiology in humans. Therefore, to enhance the success of translating these findings, we propose two approaches. First, thorough evaluation of experimental targets in multiple animal models, including nonhuman primates, should precede clinical trials. Second, we advocate for combination therapy, which involves using multiple agents simultaneously, especially in the early and potentially reversible stages of the disease. These strategies aim to increase the chances of successful neuroprotective treatment for glaucoma.

Data Monitoring Committees and clinical trials: From scientific justification to organisation

Clinical trials often last several months or even several years. As the trial progresses, it can be tempting to find out whether the data obtained already answers the question posed at the start of the trial in order to stop inclusions or monitoring earlier. However, knowing and taking into account interim results can sometimes compromise the integrity of the results, which is counterproductive. To minimise this risk and ensure that the treatments are assessed reliably, safety and/or efficacy criteria are monitored during the study by a Data Monitoring Committee. After receiving the results confidentially, the Data Monitoring Committee assesses the benefit/risk ratio of the study treatment and recommends that the trial be continued, modified or terminated. Data Monitoring Committee members issuing these recommendations have an important responsibility: a hasty decision to end the trial may lead to inconclusive results unable to answer the initial question and, inversely, delaying the decision to end the trial may expose the subjects to potentially ineffective or even harmful interventions. The Data Monitoring Committee's task is therefore particularly complex. With this in mind, the round table discussion at the Giens workshops was a chance to review the scientific justification for creating Data Monitoring Committees and to recall the need for their members to receive comprehensive training on the complexities of multiple analyses, confidentiality requirements applying to the results and the need for them to be aware that recommendations to end a trial must be based on data that is robust enough to assess the benefit/risk ratio of the treatment studied.

The evolving role of data & safety monitoring boards for real-world clinical trials

Introduction

Clinical trials provide the "gold standard" evidence for advancing the practice of medicine, even as they evolve to integrate real-world data sources. Modern clinical trials are increasingly incorporating real-world data sources - data not intended for research and often collected in free-living contexts. We refer to trials that incorporate real-world data sources as real-world trials. Such trials may have the potential to enhance the generalizability of findings, facilitate pragmatic study designs, and evaluate real-world effectiveness. However, key differences in the design, conduct, and implementation of real-world vs traditional trials have ramifications in data management that can threaten their desired rigor.

Methods

Three examples of real-world trials that leverage different types of data sources - wearables, medical devices, and electronic health records are described. Key insights applicable to all three trials in their relationship to Data and Safety Monitoring Boards (DSMBs) are derived.

Results

Insight and recommendations are given on four topic areas: A. Charge of the DSMB; B. Composition of the DSMB; C. Pre-launch Activities; and D. Post-launch Activities. We recommend stronger and additional focus on data integrity.

Conclusions

Clinical trials can benefit from incorporating real-world data sources, potentially increasing the generalizability of findings and overall trial scale and efficiency. The data, however, present a level of informatic complexity that relies heavily on a robust data science infrastructure. The nature of monitoring the data and safety must evolve to adapt to new trial scenarios to protect the rigor of clinical trials.

Monitoring Multiple U.S. Government-Supported Covid-19 Vaccine Trials

Monitoring U.S. Government-Supported Covid-19 Vaccine TrialsOperation Warp Speed was a partnership created to accelerate the development of Covid-19 vaccines. The National Institutes of Health oversaw one data and safety monitoring board to review/monitor all Operation Warp Speed trials. This article describes the challenges faced in monitoring these trials and provides ideas for future similar endeavors.

The Data and Safety Monitoring Board: The Toughest Job in Clinical Trials

The DSMB: The Toughest Job in Clinical TrialsIn this review article, the authors discuss methods that DSMBs can use to compare the absolute and relative risks of benefits and adverse effects between trial interventions and illustrate how the DSMB can use this approach to evaluate the balance of these competing risks. Two approaches are discussed - the win ratio and the DOOR probability on one treatment relative to another.

The Impact of Landscape Changes on Data and Safety Monitoring Board Oversight of Clinical Trials

Impact of Landscape Changes on DSMB OversightThis Clinical Trials Workshop describes how external factors (or landscape changes) can affect monitoring of an ongoing clinical trial and discusses issues to consider to avoid stopping a trial too early while maintaining equipoise for enrolled participants. Three clinical trials in which DSMBs had to consider the effects of landscape changes on the continued performance of the monitored trial are reviewed.

Early Termination of Clinical Trials for Futility - Considerations for a Data and Safety Monitoring Board

Early Termination of Clinical Trials for FutilityClinical trials may be stopped for futility if there is little or no chance of demonstrating the hoped-for effect. Reasons include evidence of no treatment effect, substantial missing data that would unacceptably undermine trial conclusions, or event rates too low to support meaningful comparisons. This review examines issues faced by DSMBs in such settings.

A Proposal to Increase Value and Equity in the Development and Distribution of New Pharmaceuticals

The process of developing and marketing new pharmaceuticals in the United States is driven by a need to maximize returns to shareholders. This results all too often in the production of new medications that are expensive and of marginal value to patients and society. In line with our heightened awareness of the importance of social justice and public health—and in light of our government‘s alliance with private companies in bringing us COVID-19 vaccines—we need to reconsider how new pharmaceuticals are developed and distributed. Accordingly, we propose the creation of a new agency of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) that would direct the whole process. This agency would fund the research and development of high-value medications, closely monitor the clinical studies of these new drugs, and manage their distribution at prices that are value-based, fair, and equitable.

Stopping Trials Early Due to Harm

Stopping Trials Early Due to HarmDSMBs protect clinical trial participants from harm. We describe two trials stopped for potential harm to enrollees: a DSMB recommended termination soon after enrollment began when data showed higher mortality in the experimental versus the control arm, and a trial with completed enrollment was stopped while participants were being followed and treated.