Outcome Measures in Bone Metastases Clinical Trials

BACKGROUND Clinical trials in multiple sclerosis (MS) have leveraged the use of digital technology to overcome limitations in treatment and disease monitoring. OBJECTIVE To review the use of digital technology in concluded and ongoing MS clinical trials. METHODS In March 2020, we searched for “multiple sclerosis” and “trial” on pubmed.gov and clinicaltrials.gov using “app”, “digital”, “electronic”, “internet” and “mobile” as additional search words, separately. Overall, we included thirty-five studies. RESULTS Digital technology is part of clinical trial interventions to deliver psychotherapy and motor rehabilitation, with exergames, e-training, and robot-assisted exercises. Also, digital technology has become increasingly used to standardise previously existing outcome measures, with automatic acquisitions, reduced inconsistencies, and improved detection of symptoms. Some trials have been developing new patient-centred outcome measures for the detection of symptoms and of treatment side effects and adherence. CONCLUSIONS We will discuss how digital technology has been changing MS clinical trial design, and possible future directions for MS and neurology research.

Download Full-text

Use of connected digital products in clinical research following the COVID-19 pandemic: a comprehensive analysis of clinical trials

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2020-047341 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 11 (6) ◽

pp. e047341

Author(s):

Caroline Marra ◽

William J Gordon ◽

Ariel Dora Stern

Keyword(s):

Clinical Trials ◽

Clinical Research ◽

Outcome Measures ◽

Remote Monitoring ◽

Search Algorithm ◽

Primary Outcome Measure ◽

Secondary Outcome ◽

Digital Products ◽

Clinical Trial Registry ◽

Before And After

ObjectivesIn an effort to mitigate COVID-19 related challenges for clinical research, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued new guidance for the conduct of ‘virtual’ clinical trials in late March 2020. This study documents trends in the use of connected digital products (CDPs), tools that enable remote patient monitoring and telehealth consultation, in clinical trials both before and after the onset of the pandemic.DesignWe applied a comprehensive text search algorithm to clinical trial registry data to identify trials that use CDPs for remote monitoring or telehealth. We compared CDP use in the months before and after the issuance of FDA guidance facilitating virtual clinical trials.SettingAll trials registered on ClinicalTrials.gov with start dates from May 2019 through February 2021.Outcome measuresThe primary outcome measure was the overall percentage of CDP use in clinical trials started in the 10 months prior to the pandemic onset (May 2019–February 2020) compared with the 10 months following (May 2020–February 2021). Secondary outcome measures included CDP usage by trial type (interventional, observational), funder type (industry, non-industry) and diagnoses (COVID-19 or non-COVID-19 participants).ResultsCDP usage in clinical trials increased by only 1.65 percentage points, from 14.19% (n=23 473) of all trials initiated in the 10 months prior to the pandemic onset to 15.84% (n=26 009) of those started in the 10 months following (p<0.01). The increase occurred primarily in observational studies and non-industry funded trials and was driven entirely by CDP usage in trials for COVID-19.ConclusionsThese findings suggest that in the short-term, new options created by regulatory guidance to stimulate telehealth and remote monitoring were not widely incorporated into clinical research. In the months immediately following the pandemic onset, CDP adoption increased primarily in observational and non-industry funded studies where virtual protocols are likely medically necessary due to the participants’ COVID-19 diagnosis.

Download Full-text

Enabling patient-reported outcome measures in clinical trials, exemplified by cardiovascular trials

Health and Quality of Life Outcomes ◽

10.1186/s12955-021-01800-1 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 19 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Theresa M. Coles ◽

Adrian F. Hernandez ◽

Bryce B. Reeve ◽

Karon Cook ◽

Michael C. Edwards ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Clinical Trials ◽

Outcome Measures ◽

Contextual Factors ◽

The United States ◽

Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽

Patient Reported Outcome ◽

Think Tank ◽

Level Of Evidence ◽

Patient Reported ◽

Evidentiary Standards

Abstract Objectives There has been limited success in achieving integration of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in clinical trials. We describe how stakeholders envision a solution to this challenge. Methods Stakeholders from academia, industry, non-profits, insurers, clinicians, and the Food and Drug Administration convened at a Think Tank meeting funded by the Duke Clinical Research Institute to discuss the challenges of incorporating PROs into clinical trials and how to address those challenges. Using examples from cardiovascular trials, this article describes a potential path forward with a focus on applications in the United States. Results Think Tank members identified one key challenge: a common understanding of the level of evidence that is necessary to support patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in trials. Think Tank participants discussed the possibility of creating general evidentiary standards depending upon contextual factors, but such guidelines could not be feasibly developed because many contextual factors are at play. The attendees posited that a more informative approach to PROM evidentiary standards would be to develop validity arguments akin to courtroom briefs, which would emphasize a compelling rationale (interpretation/use argument) to support a PROM within a specific context. Participants envisioned a future in which validity arguments would be publicly available via a repository, which would be indexed by contextual factors, clinical populations, and types of claims. Conclusions A publicly available repository would help stakeholders better understand what a community believes constitutes compelling support for a specific PROM in a trial. Our proposed strategy is expected to facilitate the incorporation of PROMs into cardiovascular clinical trials and trials in general.

Download Full-text