Diversity, equity, and inclusion in clinical trials: A practical guide from the perspective of a trial sponsor

BACKGROUND

Considering diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in clinical trials ensures that data collected for investigational treatments reflect the populations most likely to benefit from those therapies. Resources and recommendations regarding DEI were assembled by the trial sponsor to assist clinical trial development.

METHODS

A cross-disciplinary team from the sponsoring organization was assembled to inform trial planning and collate resources that promote DEI throughout the clinical trial life cycle.

RESULTS

Representatives from clinical operations, health economic outcomes research, medical affairs, patient advocacy, procurement, and research and development functional groups united together to implement DEI strategies in clinical trials. Planning strategies focus on eligibility, participant/patient engagement, feedback through patient advocacy organizations, and community interactions. Informed site, investigator, and vendor selection at trial startup supports efforts to recruit diverse target trial populations and engage underrepresented businesses; establishing relationships and demographic target-goal tracking should be maintained throughout trial management. Continued communication during trial closeout consolidates learnings and enhances partnerships with trial participants and patient advocacy organizations. The sponsoring organization continuously updates an internal library of resources to facilitate implementation of outlined strategies.

CONCLUSIONS

This first iteration of guidance intends to improve the representation of target populations who will ultimately benefit from investigational therapies; to assist sponsor clinical trial teams in developing recruitment and retention plans; and to ensure compliance with federal granting agencies. The sponsoring organization anticipates data from future clinical trials will help characterize the impact of these initiatives to ensure evidence-based practices are used in future clinical trials to enhance DEI.

Improving the patient-reported outcome sections of clinical trial protocols: a mixed methods evaluation of educational workshops

Introduction

Failure to incorporate key patient-reported outcome (PRO) content in trial protocols affects the quality and interpretability of the collected data, contributing to research waste. Our group developed evidence-based training specifically addressing PRO components of protocols. We aimed to assess whether 2-day educational workshops improved the PRO completeness of protocols against consensus-based minimum standards provided in the SPIRIT-PRO Extension in 2018.

Method

Annual workshops were conducted 2011–2017. Participants were investigators/trialists from cancer clinical trials groups. Although developed before 2018, workshops covered 15/16 SPIRIT-PRO items. Participant feedback immediately post-workshop and, retrospectively, in November 2017 was summarised descriptively. Protocols were evaluated against SPIRIT-PRO by two independent raters for workshop protocols (developed post-workshop by participants) and control protocols (contemporaneous non-workshop protocols). SPIRIT-PRO items were assessed for completeness (0 = not addressed, 10 = fully addressed). Mann–Whitney U tests assessed whether workshop protocols scored higher than controls by item and overall.

Results

Participants (n = 107) evaluated the workshop positively. In 2017, 16/41 survey responders (39%) reported never applying in practice; barriers included role restrictions (14/41, 34%) and lack of time (5/41, 12%). SPIRIT-PRO overall scores did not differ between workshop (n = 13, median = 3.81/10, interquartile range = 3.24) and control protocols (n = 9, 3.51/10 (2.14)), (p = 0.35). Workshop protocols scored higher than controls on two items: ‘specify PRO concepts/domains’ (p = 0.05); ‘methods for handling missing data’ (p = 0.044).

Conclusion

Although participants were highly satisfied with these workshops, the completeness of PRO protocol content generally did not improve. Additional knowledge translation efforts are needed to assist protocol writers address SPIRIT-PRO guidance and avoid research waste that may eventuate from sub-optimal PRO protocol content.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11136-022-03127-w.