scholarly journals Assessing the Impact of COVID‐19 on Registered Interventional Clinical Trials

Author(s):  
Nour Hawila ◽  
Arthur Berg
Keyword(s):  
Author(s):  
Francesco Piccialli ◽  
Vincenzo Schiano di Cola ◽  
Fabio Giampaolo ◽  
Salvatore Cuomo

AbstractThe first few months of 2020 have profoundly changed the way we live our lives and carry out our daily activities. Although the widespread use of futuristic robotaxis and self-driving commercial vehicles has not yet become a reality, the COVID-19 pandemic has dramatically accelerated the adoption of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in different fields. We have witnessed the equivalent of two years of digital transformation compressed into just a few months. Whether it is in tracing epidemiological peaks or in transacting contactless payments, the impact of these developments has been almost immediate, and a window has opened up on what is to come. Here we analyze and discuss how AI can support us in facing the ongoing pandemic. Despite the numerous and undeniable contributions of AI, clinical trials and human skills are still required. Even if different strategies have been developed in different states worldwide, the fight against the pandemic seems to have found everywhere a valuable ally in AI, a global and open-source tool capable of providing assistance in this health emergency. A careful AI application would enable us to operate within this complex scenario involving healthcare, society and research.


2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (Supplement_2) ◽  
pp. ii22-ii22
Author(s):  
Kyle Walsh

Abstract BACKGROUND Preliminary evidence indicates that glioma patients are at higher risk for COVID-19 complications due to systemic immunosuppression. Interruptions in cancer care may exacerbate patient and caregiver anxiety, but surveying patients/caregivers about their COVID-19 experiences is often limited by attainable sample sizes and over-reliance upon single-institution experiences. METHODS To explore how COVID-19 is impacting brain tumor patients/caregivers across the U.S., we performed semi-structured interviews with brain tumor patient navigators employed by two different 501(c)3 nonprofit organizations. A semi-structured interview guide was used, utilizing prompts and open-ended questions to facilitate dialogue. A core set of COVID-19 topics were covered, including: financial issues, coping strategies, geographic variability, variability by tumor grade/histology, disruptions in care continuity, accessing clinical trials, psychosocial issues, and end-of-life care. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and organized by discussion topic to identify emerging themes. Inductive sub-coding was completed using the constant comparison method, within and between transcripts. RESULTS/CONCLUSIONS Ten patient navigators were interviewed between April 15th and May 8th, with interviews lasting approximately one hour (range 38-77minutes). Navigators reported having contact with 183 unique brain tumor families during the pandemic (range 7–38 families per navigator). High concordance emerged across narratives, revealing important considerations for the neuro-oncology workforce. The most prominent theme was increased caregiver burden, attributed to maintaining social distancing by reducing visits from home-health aides and friends/family. A related theme that applied to both patients and caregivers was increased social isolation due to social distancing, suspension of in-person support groups, and church/temple closures. Accessing clinical trials was a recurrent issue, exacerbated by patients’ increasing unwillingness to travel. Glioblastoma patients, especially those with recurrent tumors, expressed greater reluctance to travel. Access to standard-of-care treatment was rarely interrupted, but reduced access to supportive services – especially physical and occupational therapy – was identified as an emerging COVID-related deficiency in clinical care.


2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
L Carnero Montoro ◽  
M Ruiz Ortiz ◽  
N Paredes Hurtado ◽  
M Delgado Ortega ◽  
A Rodriguez Almodovar ◽  
...  

Abstract Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: None. Background and aims Since september 14th, 2017. Three large clinical trials demonstrated that, in selected patients, percutaneous closure of patent foramen ovale (PFO) was associated with lower recurrence in patients with cryptogenic stroke (CS). Our aim was to determine the impact of these findings on routine  clinical practice in a tertiary hospital. Methods Patients with percutaneous closure of PFO due to CS (January 2001-January 2020) were included. The clinical characteristics were analyzed individually and grouped in the RoPE score, before and after the publication date. Complex anatomy (CA) defined as interatrial septum aneurysm or basal wide bubble passage was evaluated in both periods. Results 293 patients were included. The mean age was 49 ± 11 years, 15% were older than 60 years, 60% men, 26% hypertensive, 28% smokers and 7%diabetics. The median RoPEscore was 6 [p25-75, 5-7] and 75% met CA criteria. Since september 14th, 2017, the frequency of CA and the mean age of the patients were significantly higher (89% vs. 69% p <0.0005 and 51 ± 11 vs. 48 ± 11 years, p = 0.02, respectively), and RoPEscore, significantly lower (5 [5-7] vs. 6 [5-7], p = 0.02). Conclusion The publication of clinical trials wich demonstrated the benefit of percutaneous closure of PFO in CS had a significant impact on the daily clinical practice of our institution, with an increase in indications for CA, despite a clinical profile suggestive of lower causal probability of PFO.


2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
M Elharram ◽  
A Sharma ◽  
W White ◽  
G Bakris ◽  
P Rossignol ◽  
...  

Abstract Background The timing of enrolment following an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) may influence cardiovascular (CV) outcomes and potentially treatment effect in clinical trials. Using a large contemporary trial in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) post-ACS, we examined the impact of timing of enrolment on subsequent CV outcomes. Methods EXAMINE was a randomized trial of alogliptin versus placebo in 5380 patients with T2DM and a recent ACS. The primary outcome was a composite of CV death, non-fatal myocardial infarction [MI], or non-fatal stroke. The median follow-up was 18 months. In this post hoc analysis, we examined the occurrence of subsequent CV events by timing of enrollment divided by tertiles of time from ACS to randomization: 8–34, 35–56, and 57–141 days. Results Patients randomized early (compared to the latest times) had less comorbidities at baseline including a history of heart failure (HF; 24.7% vs. 33.0%), prior coronary artery bypass graft (9.6% vs. 15.9%), or atrial fibrillation (5.9% vs. 9.4%). Despite the reduced comorbidity burden, the risk of the primary outcome was highest in patients randomized early compared to the latest time (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.47; 95% CI 1.21–1.74) (Figure 1). Similarly, patients randomized early had an increased risk of recurrent MI (aHR 1.51; 95% CI 1.17–1.96) and HF hospitalization (1.49; 95% CI 1.05–2.10). Conclusion In a contemporary cohort of T2DM with a recent ACS, early randomization following the ACS increases the risk of CV events including recurrent MI and HF hospitalization. This should be taken into account when designing future clinical trials. Figure 1 Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: Private grant(s) and/or Sponsorship. Main funding source(s): Takeda Pharmaceutical


2011 ◽  
Vol 38 (8) ◽  
pp. 1699-1701 ◽  
Author(s):  
JOHN R. KIRWAN ◽  
PETER S. TUGWELL

This overview draws out the main conclusions from the 4 workshops focused on incorporating the patient perspective into outcome assessment at the 10th Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT 10) conference. They raised methodological issues about the choice of outcome domains to include in clinical trials, the development or choice of instruments to measure these domains, and the way these instruments might capture the impact of a disease and its treatment. The need to develop a more rigorous conceptual model of quantifying the way conditions affect health, and the need to ensure patients are directly involved in the decisions about domains and instruments, emerged clearly. The OMERACT participants voted to develop guidelines for domain and instrument selection, and conceptual and experimental work will be brought forward to revise and upgrade the OMERACT Filter.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document