Commentary

Author(s):  
John C. Norcross

The extraordinary contribution by Interian, Prawda, Fishman, and Buerger (this volume) presents and celebrates many of my favorite methods: motivational interviewing (MI), real-world research, cultural adaptations, therapeutic relationships, systematic case studies, and randomized clinical trials (RCTs). The reader may excuse me, then, for my unabashed enthusiasm for the chapter and for its clinical and research underpinnings. As a commentator, however, I will endeavor to highlight an occasional quibble and to offer an alternative hypothesis or two. All that within the context of my rousing burst of “Well done, colleagues! This is precisely what the future of clinical practice and psychotherapy research requires.”...

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e17041-e17041
Author(s):  
M. Ulcickas Yood ◽  
P. Feng Wang ◽  
S. Hensley Alford ◽  
S. Oliveria ◽  
K. Wells ◽  
...  

e17041 Background: Although treatment effects and toxicities have been reported from randomized clinical trials of patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN), little information is available from real-world clinical practice where heterogeneous treatment patterns and patient populations may lead to different estimates than those observed in clinical trials. Methods: Using a population-based tumor registry at a large, Midwestern integrated health system, we identified all cases of stage III or IV SCCHN diagnosed 2000–2006. The incidence/severity of acute and late toxicities associated with SCCHN treatment was obtained from detailed medical record review of health system encounters, including physician notes. Grading of toxicities (using CTCAE3 criteria), distinction between acute and late toxicity, and analyses by treatment are ongoing. The incidence and severity of toxicities will be presented by treatment regimen, tumor location and tumor stage. We presented here an interim analysis. Results: Among the target population of 194 patients that will ultimately be included in this study, 137 medical record reviews have been completed to date. The percentages of patients with toxicities, including 95% confidence intervals are presented in the table , below. Conclusions: Toxicity in patients with advanced SCCHN is common. Data from clinical practice quantifying the incidence are lacking, these data from an observational real-world study provide important baseline information on the incidence of toxicities in patients with advanced SCCHN and also call for safer effective treatment for SCCHN. [Table: see text] [Table: see text]


Author(s):  
Ofer Agid ◽  
Thomas R. E. Barnes ◽  
Majella Byrne ◽  
Araba Chintoh ◽  
Christoph U. Correll ◽  
...  

This chapter presents case histories illustrating key aspects of the treatment of schizophrenia based on the authors’ clinical experience of patients that they have treated over the years, although identifying details have been changed. The art of clinical practice includes interpreting and applying evidence to help individual patients who often do not fit into the categories used in clinical trials. The cases show the application of evidence, and also its limitations, in real-world settings. This emphasizes the need for the evidence discussed throughout this book to be considered in the individual context of each patient. You will see variation in the approaches taken by the expert clinicians discussing their cases, reflecting how they interpret and apply evidence in a given clinical context. Each case is followed by a series of learning points and links to other chapters in the book where the issue is considered further.


2020 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
pp. 117954682095341 ◽  
Author(s):  
Todd C Villines ◽  
Mark J Cziraky ◽  
Alpesh N Amin

Real-world evidence (RWE) provides a potential rich source of additional information to the body of data available from randomized clinical trials (RCTs), but there is a need to understand the strengths and limitations of RWE before it can be applied to clinical practice. To gain insight into current thinking in clinical decision making and utility of different data sources, a representative sampling of US cardiologists selected from the current, active Fellows of the American College of Cardiology (ACC) were surveyed to evaluate their perceptions of findings from RCTs and RWE studies and their application in clinical practice. The survey was conducted online via the ACC web portal between 12 July and 11 August 2017. Of the 548 active ACC Fellows invited as panel members, 173 completed the survey (32% response), most of whom were board certified in general cardiology (n = 119, 69%) or interventional cardiology (n = 40, 23%). The survey results indicated a wide range of familiarity with and utilization of RWE amongst cardiologists. Most cardiologists were familiar with RWE and considered RWE in clinical practice at least some of the time. However, a significant minority of survey respondents had rarely or never applied RWE learnings in their clinical practice, and many did not feel confident in the results of RWE other than registry data. These survey findings suggest that additional education on how to assess and interpret RWE could help physicians to integrate data and learnings from RCTs and RWE to best guide clinical decision making.


Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 2198-2198
Author(s):  
Ajeet Gajra ◽  
Richard Sweat ◽  
Yolaine Jeune-Smith ◽  
Jonathan K. Kish ◽  
Bruce A Feinberg

Introduction The ASH Annual Meeting is a venue for presentation of outcomes data from key clinical trials in hematologic malignancies and novel drug classes used to treat them. The approval of two CAR-T therapies, axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel) and tisagenlecleucel (tis-cel), in the treatment of large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL), including diffuse LBCL (DLBCL), has ushered in a new class of drugs, i.e. cellular therapy. At ASH 2018, Nastoupil et al. presented data from a retrospective analysis of the characteristics and outcomes of patients with relapsed/refractory LBCL, including DLBCL, treated with commercially available axi-cel CAR-T therapy at academic centers in the United States (Nastoupil LJ, et al. Blood. 2018;132[Suppl 1]:91). The authors found that early outcomes of real-world patients receiving axi-cel therapy were comparable to those observed in the clinical trial population, despite >40% of these patients failing to meet the clinical trial eligibility criteria. At a live meeting in February 2019, we sought the perceptions of community hematologists and oncologists (H/O) regarding their use of, referrals for and barriers to CAR-T therapy as well their perception of the value of the real-world evidence (RWE) presented. Methods A live meeting in February 2019 convened H/O with geographic representation from across the United States. The participants were shown data from selected oral and/or poster presentations from the 2018 ASH Annual Meeting and responded to questions regarding their perceptions of the data and its potential impact on current practice. Participants submitted their demographic responses via a web-based survey prior to the meeting and data impression responses via an audience response system at the live meeting. Results Among the 59 H/O who participated in this live market research program on February 22-23, 2019, 61% identified their primary specialty as hematology/oncology and 34% medical oncology. Only 27% of H/O had attended the 60th ASH Annual Meeting in December 2018. The participants were mostly community-based physicians, 50% in private community and 45% in community practices owned by a hospital or academic center. One-third have been in practice for over 20 years, one-third for 11-20 years and one-third for 10 or fewer years. This group sees an average of 20+ patients per day and reported B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma as one of the three most common hematologic malignancy they managed. 28% of H/O indicated that they have referred one patient and 24% have referred 2-5 patients for CAR-T therapy since the first approval on August 30, 2017. Of those H/O who had referred patients for CAR-T therapy, 45% indicated that none of their patients had yet received the infusion. The top two barriers to prescribing/recommending CAR-T therapy, as reported by the H/O, were the cumbersome logistics of administering therapy and following patients (52%), and the cost of the therapy (46%). Other concerns included high toxicity (24%) and lack of long-term survival data (19%), but not lack of knowledge of CAR-T therapy (2%). Furthermore, 87% of H/O agreed with the assertion that due to the limitations of randomized clinical trials, RWE is necessary to inform clinical practice. After review of the information presented on the real-world use of axi-cel, 73% of H/O indicated that this information is likely to cause them to recommend CAR-T therapy for more of their patients with DLBCL. Conclusions There is significant interest in adopting and using CAR-T therapies in LBCL amongst community H/O. This group does not perceive itself as lacking in knowledge regarding CAR-T therapy. The significant barriers of logistics and cost are potential deterrents to appropriate use. These results can inform stakeholders (manufacturers, payers, hospitals and practices) regarding the need to improve processes and develop payment models to address cost in order to facilitate access of these agents to the appropriate patients. RWE is viewed favorably by the vast majority of community H/O to inform clinical practice, due to the limitations of randomized clinical trials. Disclosures Gajra: Cardinal Health: Employment. Sweat:Cardinal Health: Employment. Jeune-Smith:Cardinal Health: Employment. Kish:Cardinal Health: Employment. Feinberg:Cardinal Health: Employment.


2020 ◽  
Vol 64 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ryan K. Shields

ABSTRACT Cefiderocol is a newly approved siderophore cephalosporin that demonstrates expanded in vitro activity against multidrug-resistant Gram-negative bacteria. In two challenging cases reported here, cefiderocol shows potential utility as salvage therapy against difficult-to-treat pathogens with limited or no treatment options; however, two multicenter, randomized clinical trials have yielded mixed results among cefiderocol-treated patients. Taken together, clinicians must balance a clear need for cefiderocol in clinical practice with the uncertainties that have stemmed from the available data.


2005 ◽  
Vol 25 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 95-98 ◽  
Author(s):  
David N. Churchill

The objective was to review the rationale for the Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (K/DOQI) recommendations for adequacy of peritoneal dialysis and to evaluate the impact of these recommendations on clinical practice and patient survival. The K/DOQI recommendations were based on large observational studies; the target weekly Kt/V value of 2.0 assumed equivalence of peritoneal and renal clearances. This assumption is no longer considered correct. The impact on clinical practice was evaluated by an examination of temporal trends before and after publication of the guidelines in 1997. In the United States and The Netherlands, there had been a trend toward increased delivered total Kt/V prior to 1997, and there was no acceleration in this trend after 1997. Two randomized clinical trials have implemented these guidelines with increased peritoneal Kt/V (or creatinine clearance) used to achieve the K/DOQI target in the intervention group. This was not associated with improved survival, compared to a lower Kt/V, in either of the randomized clinical trials. Among the explanations for the failure to improve outcome are potential adverse effects of increasing the dialysis dose. These include increased intraperitoneal pressure associated with increased exchange volume, failure to increase clearance of middle molecules, and increased exposure to glucose. Strategies that increase peritoneal clearance without exposure to these potential adverse effects include more-frequent exchanges rather than increased exchange volume, and decreased exposure to glucose and glucose degradation products. Pending such studies, current K/DOQI guidelines should be updated in a timely manner.


Author(s):  
Samantha Cruz Rivera ◽  
Derek G. Kyte ◽  
Olalekan Lee Aiyegbusi ◽  
Anita L. Slade ◽  
Christel McMullan ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are commonly collected in clinical trials and should provide impactful evidence on the effect of interventions on patient symptoms and quality of life. However, it is unclear how PRO impact is currently realised in practice. In addition, the different types of impact associated with PRO trial results, their barriers and facilitators, and appropriate impact metrics are not well defined. Therefore, our objectives were: i) to determine the range of potential impacts from PRO clinical trial data, ii) identify potential PRO impact metrics and iii) identify barriers/facilitators to maximising PRO impact; and iv) to examine real-world evidence of PRO trial data impact based on Research Excellence Framework (REF) impact case studies. Methods Two independent investigators searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL+, HMIC databases from inception until December 2018. Articles were eligible if they discussed research impact in the context of PRO clinical trial data. In addition, the REF 2014 database was systematically searched. REF impact case studies were included if they incorporated PRO data in a clinical trial. Results Thirty-nine publications of eleven thousand four hundred eighty screened met the inclusion criteria. Nine types of PRO trial impact were identified; the most frequent of which centred around PRO data informing clinical decision-making. The included publications identified several barriers and facilitators around PRO trial design, conduct, analysis and report that can hinder or promote the impact of PRO trial data. Sixty-nine out of two hundred nine screened REF 2014 case studies were included. 12 (17%) REF case studies led to demonstrable impact including changes to international guidelines; national guidelines; influencing cost-effectiveness analysis; and influencing drug approvals. Conclusions PRO trial data may potentially lead to a range of benefits for patients and society, which can be measured through appropriate impact metrics. However, in practice there is relatively limited evidence demonstrating directly attributable and indirect real world PRO-related research impact. In part, this is due to the wider challenges of measuring the impact of research and PRO-specific issues around design, conduct, analysis and reporting. Adherence to guidelines and multi-stakeholder collaboration is essential to maximise the use of PRO trial data, facilitate impact and minimise research waste. Trial registration Systematic Review registration PROSPERO CRD42017067799.


Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 133 (12) ◽  
pp. 1298-1307 ◽  
Author(s):  
Deborah M. Stephens ◽  
John C. Byrd

Abstract Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) therapy has changed dramatically with the introduction of several targeted therapeutics. Ibrutinib was the first approved for use in 2014 and now is used for initial and salvage therapy of CLL patients. With its widespread use in clinical practice, ibrutinib’s common and uncommon adverse events reported less frequently in earlier clinical trials have been experienced more frequently in real-world practice. In particular, atrial fibrillation, bleeding, infections, and arthralgias have been reported. The management of ibrutinib’s adverse events often cannot be generalized but must be individualized to the patient and their long-term risk of additional complications. When ibrutinib was initially developed, there were limited therapeutic alternatives for CLL, which often resulted in treating through the adverse events. At the present time, there are several effective alternative agents available, so transition to an alternative CLL directed therapy may be considered. Given the continued expansion of ibrutinib across many therapeutic areas, investigation of the pathogenesis of adverse events with this agent and also clinical trials examining therapeutic approaches for complications arising during therapy are needed. Herein, we provide strategies we use in real-world CLL clinical practice to address common adverse events associated with ibrutinib.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document