Clinical Trials [and Tribulations]: The Immediate Effects of COVID-19 on IBD Clinical Research Activity in the UK

COVID-19-related liver injury: Mechanisms, diagnosis, management; its impact on pre-existing conditions, cancer and liver transplant: A comprehensive review

AIMS

This review explores the mechanisms, diagnostic approaches, and management strategies for COVID-19-induced liver injury, with a focus on its impact on patients with pre-existing liver conditions, liver cancer, and those undergoing liver transplantation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A comprehensive literature review included studies on clinical manifestations of liver injury due to COVID-19. Key areas examined were direct viral effects, drug-induced liver injury, cytokine storms, and impacts on individuals with chronic liver diseases, liver transplants, and the role of vaccination. Data were collected from clinical trials, observational studies, case reports, and review literature.

KEY FINDINGS

COVID-19 can cause a spectrum of liver injuries, from mild enzyme elevations to severe hepatic dysfunction. Injury mechanisms include direct viral invasion, immune response alterations, drug toxicity, and hypoxia-reperfusion injury. Patients with chronic liver conditions (such as alcohol-related liver disease, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, cirrhosis, and hepatocellular carcinoma) face increased risks of severe outcomes. The pandemic has worsened pre-existing liver conditions, disrupted cancer treatments, and complicated liver transplantation. Vaccination remains crucial for reducing severe disease, particularly in chronic liver patients and transplant recipients. Telemedicine has been beneficial in managing patients and reducing cross-infection risks.

SIGNIFICANCE

This review discusses the importance of improved diagnostic methods and management strategies for liver injury caused by COVID-19. It emphasizes the need for close monitoring and customized treatment for high-risk groups, advocating for future research to explore long-term effects, novel therapies, and evidence-based approaches to improve liver health during and after the pandemic.

Analysis of Clinical Trial Screen Failures in Inflammatory Bowel Diseases [IBD]: Real World Results from the International Organization for the study of IBD

BACKGROUND

Recruitment for randomized controlled trials [RCTs] in inflammatory bowel diseases [IBD] has substantially dropped over time. This study aimed to assess reasons why IBD patients are not included in sponsored multicentre phase IIb-III RCTs.

METHODS

All IOIBD members [n = 58] were invited to participate. We divided barriers to participation as follows: [1] reasons patients with active IBD were not deemed appropriate for an RCT; [2] reasons qualified patients did not wish to participate; and [3] reasons for screen failure [SF] in patients agreeing to participate. We assess these in a 4-week prospective study including, consecutively, all patients with symptomatic disease for whom a treatment change was required. In addition, we performed a 6-month retrospective study to further evaluate reasons for SF.

RESULTS

A total of 106 patients (60 male [56.6%], 63 Crohn's disease [CD] [59.4%]), from ten centres across the world, were included in the prospective study. An RCT has not been proposed to 65 of them [mainly due to eligibility criteria]. Of the 41 patients to whom an RCT was offered, eight refused [mainly due to reluctance to receive placebo] and 28 agreed to participate. Among these 28 patients, five failed their screening and 23 were finally included in an RCT. A total of 107 patients (61 male [57%], 67 CD [62.6%]), from 13 centres worldwide, were included in our retrospective study of SFs. The main reason was insufficient disease activity.

CONCLUSION

This first multicentre study analysing reasons for non-enrolment in IBD RCTs shows that we lose patients at each step. Eligibility criteria, the risk of placebo assignment, and insufficient disease activity were part of the main barriers.

Ethical Considerations in Decentralized Clinical Trials

As a consequence of the COVID-19 pandemic, the number of decentralized clinical trials, trials conducted in whole or in part at locations other than traditional clinical trial sites, significantly increased. While these trials have the potential advantage of access, participant centricity, convenience, lower costs, and efficiency, they also raise a number of important ethical and practical concerns. Here we focus on a number of those concerns, including participant safety, privacy and confidentiality, remote consent, digital access and proficiency, and trial oversight. Awareness of these ethical complexities will help foster the development of processes and cooperative solutions to promote safe, ethical trials going forward, optimized to decrease burden and increase access for all participants.

The impact of COVID-19 on clinical research: the PIPPRA and MEDRA experience

Background

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has had a significant impact on clinical research. This paper aims to provide an insight into how the COVID-19 pandemic, associated public health restrictions and international guidance on the conduct of clinical research impacted two clinical rheumatology research trials - the Physiotherapist-led Intervention to Promote Physical Activity in Rheumatoid Arthritis (PIPPRA) and the MEDiterranean diet in Rheumatoid Arthritis (MEDRA) projects.

Methods

The March 2019 public health restrictions imposed to mitigate the risk of COVID-19 occurred at a time when PIPPRA was in the process of delivering assessment and intervention on a face-to-face basis (n=48) and MEDRA had commenced recruitment. Participants in PIPPRA and MEDRA had a diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis, with some being immunosuppressed and thus at a higher risk for COVID-19. The decision-making processes of both trials is outlined to demonstrate the required amendments to continue in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Results

Amendments to PIPPRA and MEDRA trial protocols were agreed and received ethical and funder approval. Both trials switched from a face-to-face delivery to a telehealth using online platforms. The PIPPRA study was paused for five months (April-August 2020), resulting in n=33 (60%) negative deviations from assessment protocol. MEDRA switched from face-to-face to online recruitment with 20% (n=35/44) negative deviations in recruitment. Of the n=18 participants who consented to participating in a face-to-face trial, just n=2 (11%) opted to engage with telehealth delivery of the intervention. MEDRA assessment and intervention deviations were 100% as no sessions were completed as planned in 2020.

Conclusions

The COVID-19 pandemic has severely impacted the PIPPRA and MEDRA clinical trials. Moving face-to-face clinical research to telehealth delivery may not be the panacea it is purported to be. Our experiences may be of benefit to researchers, clinicians, and funders in seeking to continue clinical research during a global pandemic.

Review article: Externally derived control arms-An opportunity for clinical trials in inflammatory bowel disease?

BACKGROUND

One of the greatest challenges in the current IBD clinical trial landscape is, perhaps, the recruitment and retention of eligible participants. Seamless testing of promising investigational compounds is paramount to address unmet needs, but this is hindered by a number of barriers, particularly patient concerns of placebo assignment.

AIMS

To review the use of novel trial designs leveraging externally derived data to synthetically create control groups or augment existing ones, and to summarise the regulatory position on the use of external controls for market authorisation.

METHODS

We conducted a PubMed literature search without restriction using search terms such as 'external controls' and 'historical controls' to identify relevant articles.

RESULTS

External controls are increasingly being used outside the context of cancer and rare diseases, including IBD, and increasingly recognised by regulatory bodies. Such designs, particularly in earlier phase trials, can inform key nodes in drug development and permit evaluating efficacy of interventions without combating the ethical and numerical enrolment challenges described. However, the lack of randomisation and blinding subjects them to significant bias. Groups require robust statistical and computational approaches to ensure patient-level data across groups are adequately balanced.

CONCLUSIONS

While this approach has several pitfalls, and is not robust enough to replace traditional randomised, placebo-controlled trials, it may offer a compromise to address key research questions at a more rapid pace, with fewer patients, and lower cost.

Clinical research stakeholders' experiences of clinical research during COVID-19: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic created a complex high-risk clinical research environment with clinical research activities significantly impacted. Clinical research stakeholders adapted rapidly to new clinical practices; PPE, infection control policies, all while engaging with a more unwell patient demographic. The aim of this study is to explore the experiences of conducting clinical research during COVID-19 with clinical research stakeholders.

METHODS

This qualitative study of semi-structured interviews conducted with clinical research stakeholders in an acute Hospital setting across a variety of disciplines; Consultant Geriatrician, Clinical Research Nurse, Occupational Therapy, Physiotherapy. Interviews were fully transcribed prior to reflexive thematic analysis. NVivo software was used to support data management and analysis.

RESULTS

Three main themes were produced; (1) The challenging COVID-19 clinical research landscape, (2) COVID-19 clinical research communication barriers, and (3) Adaptations and learnings from clinical research during COVID-19.

CONCLUSIONS

This study explored the experiences of conducting clinical research during COVID-19 with clinical research stakeholders examining challenges faced and adaptations required. The findings inform, equip and support clinical research stakeholders in the event of future adverse public health events.

Leveraging Virtual Technology to Conduct Clinical Trials in Inflammatory Bowel Disease

Clinical trials have led to major advances in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) care over the last few decades, yet in that time most clinical trial protocols in IBD have remained markedly the same. Many IBD protocols often still require face-to-face visits and monitoring, hospital-based medication administration, paper-based forms and questionnaires, and short follow-up periods resulting in limited long-term data. These factors have recently been recognized as likely contributors to the low recruitment and lack of diversity of participants across clinical trials in IBD. However, with increasing technological advances, there is now an opportunity for improvement. This article assesses a range of virtual innovations for how they may offer digital solutions to challenges currently encountered in IBD clinical trials. Such solutions include consideration for increasing patient diversity, digital invitation, remote consent and recruitment, virtual visits, remote patient monitoring and data collection, remote medication delivery and administration, remote clinical trial monitoring, and routinely collected health data for long-term follow-up. Adoption of virtual technology may drive the field toward patient centricity and more efficient trial protocols to allow for a new era in IBD clinical trials.

Results of the Seventh Scientific Workshop of ECCO: Precision Medicine in IBD-Disease Outcome and Response to Therapy

Inflammatory bowel diseases [IBD] are a heterogeneous spectrum with two extreme phenotypes, Crohn's disease [CD] and ulcerative colitis [UC], which both represent numerous phenotypical variations. Hence, we should no longer approach all IBD patients similarly, but rather aim to rethink clinical classifications and modify treatment algorithms to usher in a new era of precision medicine in IBD. This scientific ECCO workshop aims to provide a state-of-the-art overview on prognostic and predictive markers, shed light on key questions in biomarker development, propose best practices in IBD biomarker development [including trial design], and discuss the potential for multi-omic data integration to help drive further advances to make precision medicine a reality in IBD.

The impact of COVID-19 on clinical research: the PIPPRA and MEDRA experience

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has had a significant impact on clinical research. This paper aims to provide an insight into how the COVID-19 pandemic, associated public health restrictions and international guidance on the conduct of clinical research impacted two clinical rheumatology research trials - the Physiotherapist-led Intervention to Promote Physical Activity in Rheumatoid Arthritis (PIPPRA) and the MEDiterranean diet in Rheumatoid Arthritis (MEDRA) projects. Methods: The March 2019 public health restrictions imposed to mitigate the risk of COVID-19 occurred at a time when PIPPRA was in the process of delivering assessment and intervention on a face-to-face basis (n=48) and MEDRA had commenced recruitment. Participants in PIPPRA and MEDRA had a diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis, with some being immunosuppressed and thus at a higher risk for COVID-19. The decision-making processes of both trials is outlined to demonstrate the required amendments to continue in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Results: Amendments to PIPPRA and MEDRA trial protocols were agreed and received ethical and funder approval. Both trials switched from a face-to-face delivery to a telehealth using online platforms. The PIPPRA study was paused for five months (April-August 2020), resulting in n=33 (60%) deviations from assessment protocol. MEDRA switched from face-to-face to online recruitment with 20% (n=35/44) deviation in recruitment. Of the n=18 participants who consented to participating in a face-to-face trial, just n=2 (11%) opted to engage with telehealth delivery of the intervention. MEDRA assessment and intervention deviations were 100% as no sessions were completed as planned in 2020. Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic has severely impacted the PIPPRA and MEDRA clinical trials. Moving face-to-face clinical research to telehealth delivery may not be the panacea it is purported to be. Our experiences may be of benefit to researchers, clinicians, and funders in seeking to continue clinical research during a global pandemic.

Managing clinical trials during COVID-19: experience from a clinical research facility

There is a dearth of literature on best practices for managing clinical trials, and little is understood on the role of the clinical trial manager. The COVID-19 pandemic has brought this into focus, and the continuance of clinical trials worldwide has been catapulted into a state of uncertainty as countries enter lockdown to manage the spread of the virus. Participant retention is an ongoing issue in clinical trials, and the concern is that in the current pandemic environment, attrition will be an issue which could potentially jeopardise trial completion. The current situation has necessitated timely problem solving by the trial manager to ensure trials remain open, and most importantly, that participant safety, paramount in clinical trials, is monitored. The purpose of our study is to highlight key issues arising in the management of clinical trials during a pandemic from first-hand experience in a clinical research facility managing both academic and commercial clinical trials. We offer some practical guidance on solution implementation.