Optimization of the decision-making process for the selection of therapeutics to undergo clinical testing for spinal cord injury in the North American Clinical Trials Network

A Step Toward the Development of the First National Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Framework to Support Healthcare Decision Making in Saudi Arabia

OBJECTIVES

To assess the feasibility of implementing multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) and to select the criteria for preparing a national MCDA framework for health technology assessment of orphan drugs in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA).

METHODS

The study was conducted in 3 phases. In phase I, a targeted literature review was performed to gather relevant information on the implementation of MCDA in healthcare decision making. Phase II was a cross-sectional survey, conducted to obtain insights from different stakeholders and key opinion leaders on specific topics from the KSA perspective. Phase III included a round-table discussion involving experts to validate the results obtained in the phase II survey and further elaborate on specific requirements that may be critical for developing the first national MCDA framework in the KSA.

RESULTS

All the key opinion leaders involved in the study acknowledged the importance of implementing MCDA in the KSA. The Ministry of Health was assigned the responsibility of chairing the MCDA decision process. The experts selected the quantitative, qualitative, and economic criteria to be considered for the MCDA framework. The stakeholders decided to initiate a pilot phase using the deliberative MCDA methodology for the assessment of orphan drugs based on the selected criteria for a period of 1 year and then reevaluate the need to adapt the pragmatic MCDA model.

CONCLUSION

This article describes the novel initiative that examined the feasibility and process required for the development of the first MCDA framework in the KSA to support healthcare decision making.

An Introduction to the North American Clinical Trials Network for Spinal Cord Injury Special Edition: Reflections on Accomplishments and a Look to the Future

The North American Clinical Trials Network (NACTN) has been established as a network of translational clinical research centers focused on traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI) with the goals of facilitating clinical translational research, promotion of enhanced clinical care protocols including the principle of early surgery for SCI, and improving outcomes for individuals with acute SCI. Since its foundation in 2004 by Dr. Robert Grossman, NACTN has evolved into a powerful multi-stakeholder consortium of eight neurosurgical department faculties at university-affiliated institutions in the United States and Canada, a data management center, and a pharmacological center. To date, high-quality data from more than 1000 patients have been prospectively collected, providing us with a strong body of evidence surrounding SCI epidemiology, the natural history, and complications of acute and subacute SCI management. Key accomplishments of NACTN are summarized in this Focus issue. They include the launch, in collaboration with AO Spine, of the international, multi-center, placebo-controlled, Phase III Riluzole in Acute Spinal Cord Injury Study (RISCIS) that recruited 192 patients. While the primary analyses did not achieve the predetermined endpoint of efficacy for Riluzole, likely related to insufficient power, pre-planned secondary analyses demonstrated that all subgroups of cervical SCI subjects (AIS grades A, B and C) treated with Riluzole showed significant gains in functional recovery. The Focus Issue also includes a detailed analysis of the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of riluzole in the setting of acute SCI (RISCIS-PK study). Additional achievements include key contributions to the evidence supporting the role of early surgery in acute SCI, and a better understanding of the impact of complications on the outcomes of SCI. Future directions of NACTN will build on past accomplishments and focus on enhanced collaborations with other SCI networks, advanced analytics to examine large datasets, and a greater focus on chronic SCI.

Importance of Prospective Registries and Clinical Research Networks in the Evolution of Spinal Cord Injury Care

Only 100 years ago, traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI) was commonly lethal. Today, most people who sustain SCI survive with continual efforts to improve their quality of life and neurological outcomes. SCI epidemiology is changing as preventative interventions reduce injuries in younger individuals, and there is an increased incidence of incomplete injuries in aging populations. Early treatment has become more intensive with decompressive surgery and proactive interventions to improve spinal cord perfusion. Accurate data, including specialized outcome measures, are crucial to understanding the impact of epidemiological and treatment trends. Dedicated SCI clinical research and data networks and registries have been established in the United States, Canada, Europe, and several other countries. We review four registry networks: the North American Clinical Trials Network (NACTN) SCI Registry, the National Spinal Cord Injury Model Systems (SCIMS) Database, the Rick Hansen SCI Registry (RHSCIR), and the European Multi-Center Study about Spinal Cord Injury (EMSCI). We compare the registries' focuses, data platforms, advanced analytics use, and impacts. We also describe how registries' data can be combined with electronic health records (EHRs) or shared using federated analysis to protect registrants' identities. These registries have identified changes in epidemiology, recovery patterns, complication incidence, and the impact of practice changes such as early decompression. They've also revealed latent disease-modifying factors, helped develop clinical trial stratification models, and served as matched control groups in clinical trials. Advancing SCI clinical science for personalized medicine requires advanced analytical techniques, including machine learning, counterfactual analysis, and the creation of digital twins. Registries and other data sources help drive innovation in SCI clinical science.

Variability in Early Surgery for Acute Cervical Spinal Cord Injury Patients: An Opportunity for Enhanced Care Delivery

Data supporting the benefits of early surgical intervention in acute spinal cord injury (SCI) is growing. For early surgery to be accomplished, understanding the causes of variabilities that effect the timing of surgery is needed to achieve this goal. The purpose of this analysis is to determine factors that affect the timing of surgery for acute cervical SCI within the North American Clinical Trials Network (NACTN) for SCI registry. Patients in the NACTN SCI registry from 2005 to 2019 with a cervical SCI, excluding acute traumatic central cord syndrome, were analyzed for time elapsed from injury to arrival to the hospital, and time to surgery. Two categories were defined: 1) Early Arrival with Early Surgery (EAES) commenced within 24 h of injury, and 2) Early Arrival but Delayed Surgery (EADS), with surgery occurring between 24 to 72 h post-injury. Patients' demographic features, initial clinical evaluation, medical comorbidities, neurological status, surgical intervention, complications, and outcome data were correlated with respect to the two arrival groups. Of the 222 acute cervical SCI patients undergoing surgery, 163 (73.4%) were EAES, and 59 (26.6%) were EADS. There was no statistical difference in arrival time between the EAES and EADS groups. There was a statistical difference in the median arrival time to surgery between the EAES group (9 h) compared with the EADS group (31 h; p < 0.05). There was no statistical difference in race, sex, age, mechanism of injury, Acute Physiologic Assessment and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II scores, or medical comorbidities between the two groups, but the EAES group did present with a significantly lower systolic blood pressure (p < 0.05). EADS patients were more likely to present as an American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale (AIS) D than EAES (p < 0.05). Early surgery was statistically more likely to occur if the injury occurred over the weekend (p < 0.05). There were variations in the rates of early surgery between the eight NACTN sites within the study, ranging from 57 to 100%. Of the 114 patients with 6-month outcome data, there was no significant change between the two groups regarding AIS grade change and motor/pin prick/light touch score recovery. A trend towards improved motor scores with early surgery was not statistically significant (p = 0.21). Although there is data that surgery within 24 h of injury improves outcomes and can be performed safely, there remain variations in care outside of clinical trials. In the present study of cervical SCI, NACTN achieved its goal of early surgery in 73.4% of patients from 2005-2019 who arrived within 24 h of their injury. Variability in achieving this goal was related to severity of neurological injury, the day of the week, and the treating NACTN center. Evaluating variations within our network improves understanding of potential systemic limitations and our decision-making process to accomplish the goal of early surgery.

Regulating the fate of stem cells for regenerating the intervertebral disc degeneration

Lower back pain is a leading cause of disability and is one of the reasons for the substantial socioeconomic burden. The etiology of intervertebral disc (IVD) degeneration is complicated, and its mechanism is still not completely understood. Factors such as aging, systemic inflammation, biochemical mediators, toxic environmental factors, physical injuries, and genetic factors are involved in the progression of its pathophysiology. Currently, no therapy for restoring degenerated IVD is available except pain management, reduced physical activities, and surgical intervention. Therefore, it is imperative to establish regenerative medicine-based approaches to heal and repair the injured disc, repopulate the cell types to retain water content, synthesize extracellular matrix, and strengthen the disc to restore normal spine flexion. Cellular therapy has gained attention for IVD management as an alternative therapeutic option. In this review, we present an overview of the anatomical and molecular structure and the surrounding pathophysiology of the IVD. Modern therapeutic approaches, including proteins and growth factors, cellular and gene therapy, and cell fate regulators are reviewed. Similarly, small molecules that modulate the fate of stem cells for their differentiation into chondrocytes and notochordal cell types are highlighted.

Cell Therapies for Spinal Cord Injury: Trends and Challenges of Current Clinical Trials

Cell therapies have the potential to revolutionize the treatment of spinal cord injury. Basic research has progressed significantly in recent years, with a plethora of cell types now reaching early-phase human clinical trials, offering new strategies to repair the spinal cord. However, despite initial enthusiasm for preclinical and early-phase clinical trials, there has been a notable hiatus in the translation of cell therapies to routine clinical practice. Here, we review cell therapies that have reached clinical trials for spinal cord injury, providing a snapshot of all registered human trials and a summary of all published studies. Of registered trials, the majority have used autologous cells and approximately a third have been government funded, a third industry sponsored, and a third funded by university or healthcare systems. A total of 37 cell therapy trials have been published, primarily using stem cells, although a smaller number have used Schwann cells or olfactory ensheathing cells. Significant challenges remain for cell therapy trials in this area, including achieving stringent regulatory standards, ensuring appropriately powered efficacy trials, and establishing sustainable long-term funding. However, cell therapies hold great promise for human spinal cord repair and future trials must continue to capitalize on the exciting developments emerging from preclinical studies.

Granulocyte-colony stimulating factor administration for neurological improvement in patients with postrehabilitation chronic incomplete traumatic spinal cord injuries: a double-blind randomized controlled clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

Granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) is a major growth factor for activation and differentiation of granulocyte colonies in the bone marrow. This cytokine has been widely and safely employed in different conditions over many years. The purpose of this study was to investigate the efficacy of G-CSF administration for traumatic spinal cord injury (TSCI).

METHODS

This double-blind parallel randomized, placebo-controlled, clinical trial, a phase III study, was performed from June 2013 to June 2016 in the Brain and Spinal Cord Injury Research (BASIR) center at Tehran University of Medical Sciences (TUMS). It included 120 patients with incomplete chronic TSCI, American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) Impairment Scale (AIS) B, C, or D, of at least 6 months’ duration. Sixty patients were allocated into the treatment group and 60 patients into the control group. All the patients had completed an outpatient rehabilitation program in the postacute period and were in a neurological and functional plateau. Patients were assessed with the ASIA grading system, the Spinal Cord Independence Measure (SCIM-III), and the International Association of Neurorestoratology-Spinal Cord Injury Functional Rating Scale (IANR-SCIFRS) just before intervention and at 1, 3, and 6 months after 7 subcutaneous administrations of 300 μg/day of G-CSF in the treatment group and placebo in the control group (administered once per day over the course of 1 week). Randomization was performed with randomized block design, and the patients and evaluators were blinded regarding the treatment groups. One patient did not receive the entire allocated intervention and 5 patients were lost to follow-up. Thus data from 114 patients were included in the analysis.

RESULTS

One hundred twenty patients were randomized and allocated into the study groups. Among them, 56 patients (93.3%) in the G-CSF group and 58 patients (96.6%) in the placebo group completed the study protocol. After 6 months of follow-up, AIS in the placebo group remained unchanged, whereas in the G-CSF group, 1 patient improved from AIS B to C, and 4 patients improved from AIS C to D. The mean (± SE) improvement in ASIA motor score in the G-CSF group was 5.5 ± 0.62, which was significantly more than in the placebo group (0.77 ± 0.20) (p < 0.001). The mean light touch and pinprick sensory scores, respectively, increased by 6.1 ± 1.1 and 8.7 ± 1.5 in the G-CSF group and by 1.3 ± 0.52 and 0.89 ± 0.44 scores in the placebo group (p < 0.001). Evaluation of functional improvement by the IANR-SCIFRS instrument revealed significantly more improvement in the G-CSF group (3.5 ± 0.37) than in the placebo group (0.41 ± 0.12) (p < 0.001). Also, a significant difference was observed in functional improvement between the 2 groups as measured by SCIM-III instrument (7.5 ± 0.95 vs 2.1 ± 0.51, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Administration of G-CSF for incomplete chronic spinal cord injuries is associated with significant motor, sensory, and functional improvement.

Clinical trial registration no.: IRCT201108297441N1 (www.irct.ir)

Utilization of multiple-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) to support healthcare decision-making FIFARMA, 2016

Background and objectives:   MCDA is a decision-making tool with increasing use in the healthcare sector, including HTA (Health Technology Assessment). By applying multiple criteria, including innovation, in a comprehensive, structured and explicit manner, MCDA fosters a transparent, participative, consistent decision-making process taking into consideration values of all stakeholders. This paper by FIFARMA (Latin American Federation of Pharmaceutical Industry) proposes the deliberative (partial) MCDA as a more pragmatic, agile approach, especially when newly implemented. Methods: Literature review including real-world examples of effective MCDA implementation in healthcare decision making in both the public and private sector worldwide and in LA. Results and conclusion: It is the view of FIFARMA that MCDA should strongly be considered as a tool to support HTA and broader healthcare decision making such as the contracts and tenders process in order to foster transparency, fairness, and collaboration amongst stakeholders.

Developing a spinal cord injury research strategy using a structured process of evidence review and stakeholder dialogue. Part II: Background to a research strategy

STUDY DESIGN

Literature review/semi-structured interviews.

OBJECTIVE

To develop a spinal cord injury (SCI) research strategy for Australia and New Zealand.

SETTING

Australia.

METHODS

The National Trauma Research Institute Forum approach of structured evidence review and stakeholder consultation was employed. This involved gathering from published literature and stakeholder consultation the information necessary to properly consider the challenge, and synthesising this into a briefing document.

RESULTS

A research strategy 'roadmap' was developed to define the major steps and key planning questions to consider; next, evidence from published SCI research strategy initiatives was synthesised with information from four one-on-one semi-structured interviews with key SCI research stakeholders to create a research strategy framework, articulating six key themes and associated activities for consideration. These resources, combined with a review of SCI prioritisation literature, were used to generate a list of draft principles for discussion in a structured stakeholder dialogue meeting.

CONCLUSION

The research strategy roadmap and framework informed discussion at a structured stakeholder dialogue meeting of 23 participants representing key SCI research constituencies, results of which are published in a companion paper. These resources could also be of value in other research strategy or planning exercises.

SPONSORSHIP

This project was funded by the Victorian Transport Accident Commission and the Australian and New Zealand Spinal Cord Injury Network.

Comparison of neurological and functional outcomes after administration of granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor in motor-complete versus motor-incomplete postrehabilitated, chronic spinal cord injuries: a phase I/II study

Granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) is a major growth factor in the activation and differentiation of granulocytes. This cytokine has been widely and safely employed in different disease conditions over many years. The administration of the growth factors in spinal cord injury (SCI) has been reported elsewhere; here we have tried to see the effect of SCI severity on the neurological outcomes after neuroprotective treatment for SCI with G-CSF. Seventy-four consecutive patients with SCI of at least 6 months' duration, with stable neurological status in the last 3 months, having informed consent for the treatment were included in the study. All the patients had undergone at least 3 months of standard rehabilitation. Patients were assessed by the American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) scale, Spinal Cord Independence Measure (SCIM) III, and International Association of Neurorestoratology-Spinal Cord Injury Functional Rating Scale (IANR-SCIFRS) just before intervention and periodically until 6 months after subcutaneous administration of 5 µg/kg per day of G-CSF for 7 consecutive days. Multiple linear regression models were performed for statistical evaluation of lesion completeness and level of injury on changes in ASIA motor, light touch, pinprick, IANR-SCIFRS, and SCIM III scores, as a phase I/II comparative study. The study consisted of 52 motor-complete and 22 motor-incomplete SCI patients. There was no significant difference regarding age and sex, chronicity, and level of SCI between the two groups. Motor-incomplete patients had significantly more improvement in ASIA motor score compared to the motor-complete patients (7.68 scores, p < 0.001); also they had significant improvement in light touch (6.42 scores, p = 0.003) and pinprick sensory scores (4.89 scores, p = 0.011). Therefore, G-CSF administration in motor-incomplete SCIs is associated with significantly higher motor improvement, and also the higher the initial ASIA Impairment Scale (AIS) grade, the less would be the final AIS change, and incomplete cases are more welcome into the future studies. This manuscript is published as part of the International Association of Neurorestoratology (IANR) special issue of Cell Transplantation.

Assessing the value of healthcare interventions using multi-criteria decision analysis: a review of the literature

The objective of this study is to support those undertaking a multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) by reviewing the approaches adopted in healthcare MCDAs to date, how these varied with the objective of the study, and the lessons learned from this experience. Searches of EMBASE and MEDLINE identified 40 studies that provided 41 examples of MCDA in healthcare. Data were extracted on the objective of the study, methods employed, and decision makers' and study authors' reflections on the advantages and disadvantages of the methods. The recent interest in MCDA in healthcare is mirrored in an increase in the application of MCDA to evaluate healthcare interventions. Of the studies identified, the first was published in 1990, but more than half were published since 2011. They were undertaken in 18 different countries, and were designed to support investment (coverage and reimbursement), authorization, prescription, and research funding allocation decisions. Many intervention types were assessed: pharmaceuticals, public health interventions, screening, surgical interventions, and devices. Most used the value measurement approach and scored performance using predefined scales. Beyond these similarities, a diversity of different approaches were adopted, with only limited correspondence between the approach and the type of decision or product. Decision makers consulted as part of these studies, as well as the authors of the studies are positive about the potential of MCDA to improve decision making. Further work is required, however, to develop guidance for those undertaking MCDA.

The cancer drug tamoxifen: a potential therapeutic treatment for spinal cord injury

Tamoxifen (TMX) is a selective estrogen receptor modulator that can mimic the neuroprotective effects of estrogen but lacks its systemic adverse effects. We found that TMX (1 mg/day) significantly improved the motor recovery of partially paralyzed hind limbs of male adult rats with thoracic spinal cord injury (SCI), thus indicating a translational potential for this cancer medication given its clinical safety and applicability and the lack of currently available treatments for SCI. To shed light on the mechanisms underlying the beneficial effects of TMX for SCI, we used proteomic analyses, Western blots and histological assays, which showed that TMX treatment spared mature oligodendrocytes/increased myelin levels and altered reactive astrocytes, including the upregulation of the water channels aquaporin 4 (AQP4), a novel finding. AQP4 increases in TMX-treated SCI rats were associated with smaller fluid-filled cavities with borders consisting of densely packed AQP4-expressing astrocytes that closely resemble the organization of normal glia limitans externa (in contrast to large cavities in control SCI rats that lacked glia limitans-like borders and contained reactive glial cells). Based on our findings, we propose that TMX is a promising candidate for the therapeutic treatment of SCI and a possible intervention for other neuropathological conditions associated with demyelination and AQP4 dysfunction.