The role of community advisory boards in community-based HIV clinical trials: a qualitative study from Tanzania

Background Community Advisory Boards (CAB) have become essential organs of involving communities in HIV clinical trials especially in developing countries. However, limited empirical evidence exists on the role of CABs in low and middle-income countries including Tanzania. This study aims at exploring the role of CABs in community-based HIV clinical trials conducted in Tanzania. Methodology We adopted a phenomenological approach to purposefully select HIV clinical trial stakeholders. These included CAB members, researchers and Institutional Review Board (IRB) members in Tanzania. We conducted In-depth Interviews (IDIs) with ten participants and three Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) with eighteen participants. The data were thematically analyzed with the aid of MAXQDA software version 20.2.1. Results The findings indicate that at every stage of implementation of a community-based HIV clinical trial, a functioning CAB is important for its success. This importance is based on contextualization of the informed consent process and protocol, managing rumours in the community, weighing trial risks and benefits, sensitizing the community, assisting participant recruitment, tracing and retention. However, being perceived as financial beneficiaries than community representatives emerged as a challenge to CAB members. Conclusion The study empirically indicates the need for functioning CABs in every stage of implementation of community-based HIV clinical trials. The roles of which are interwoven in serving research goals and protecting the interests of the community and that of trial participants.

Motivation for people living with dementia to engage in research advisory boards

The importance of Public Involvement (PI) is increasingly being recognized in the field of dementia research. In 2012, Alzheimer Europe set up the European Working Group of People with Dementia (EWGPWD) which provides advice and input for all activities of the organization including several large European-funded research projects. The German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE) created a research advisory patient board in 2020 with the intention of supporting the board in strategic research decisions. Both groups are composed of people with dementia and act independently. With the aim of finding out whether PI in research is mutually rewarding and beneficial, members of both groups were asked about their motivation to be involved in PI research activities and the value this had for them. This was collected either through narrative interviews or during meetings. People with dementia described several reasons for being involved in PI activities in dementia research.

Using Advisory Boards to Develop a Faith-Based Toolbox to Support African American Families Facing Dementia

For this project, we are designing and testing the feasibility of employing components of a Faith-based Home Activity Toolbox (Faith-HAT). The goal of this NIH stage 1 intervention development project is to go beyond the four walls of the church to find ways to meet the spiritual needs of persons living with moderate and severe dementia “where they are” to help them remain religiously and spiritually engaged. This mixed-methods project is designed in 2 phases: (a) developing a prototype Faith-HAT and (b) testing the feasibility and exploring preliminary effectiveness. To successfully conduct this project, we have included a community advisory board of church leaders, caregivers, and persons living with dementia as members of the research design team to advise on the design and implementation of the Faith-HAT. Brainstorming workshops with the board are used to ensure the research is meeting the needs of the African American families affected by dementia.

Structure, Process and Outcomes in Patient Engagement

Although patient engagement in research is gaining acceptance by researchers and funding bodies, descriptions of implementation options and associated outcomes are limited. In this appreciative inquiry of the 12 institutions involved in the Great Plains Collaborative of the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Network (PCORnet), we interviewed patient engagement officers and patient partners to enhance understanding of approaches to organizational structure, research engagement processes, and associated outcomes of the engaged research. Multiple structures have been identified including operational affiliations in both hospital and multiple university departments. Professional affiliations of patient engagement officers vary widely, including nurses, social workers, and public health professionals, among others. Patient engagement processes also vary, but with the majority using forms of advisory boards. All sites reported outcomes of their work including completed and/or ongoing research and co-authored publications.

Building Researchers' Capacity for Embracing the Engagement of Older Adults in Research

The Sage Resource Project aimed to broaden the pool of researchers who include the voice of older adults using long-term services and supports (LTSS) in research processes. We developed training to build researcher capacity to engage older adults through the development of Sage Model research advisory boards. Methods included training strategies for learning mode, design, duration, and emphasis of content that were informed by results of a researcher needs assessment and input from 2 older adult research advisory boards. Over 100 researchers registered for a 4-webinar series. All respondents to webinar evaluations (22) reported learning about topics that aligned with webinar objectives and had interest in engaging older adult stakeholders and/or developing an older adult research advisory board in the future. Representatives from five universities expressed interest attending online interactive workshops to build advisory boards. Lessons learned identify directions for research on best practices for developing older adult advisory groups.

Capacity of community advisory boards for effective engagement in clinical research: a mixed methods study

Background Community engagement is a key component in health research. One of the ways health researchers ensure community engagement is through Community Advisory Boards (CABs). The capacity of CABs to properly perform their role in clinical research has not been well described in many resource limited settings. In this study, we assessed the capacity of CABs for effective community engagement in Uganda. Methods We conducted a cross sectional study with mixed methods. We used structured questionnaires and key informant interviews (KII) to collect data from CAB members, trial investigators, and community liaison officers. For quantitative data, we used descriptive statistics while for qualitative data we used content analysis. Results Seventy three CAB members were interviewed using structured questionnaires; 58.9% males, median age 49 years (IQR 24–70), 71.2% had attained tertiary education, 42.5% never attended any research ethics training, only 26% had a training in human subject protection, 30.1% had training in health research, 50.7% never attended any training about the role of CABs, and 72.6% had no guidelines for their operation. On the qualitative aspect, 24 KIIs cited CAB members to have some skills and ability to understand and review study documents, offer guidance on community norms and expectations and give valuable feedback to the investigators. However, challenges like limited resources, lack of independence and guidelines, and knowledge gaps about research ethics were cited as hindrances of CABs capacity. Conclusion Though CABs have some capacity to perform their role in the Ugandan setting, their functionality is limited by lack of resources to facilitate their work, lack of independence, lack of guidelines for their operations and limited knowledge regarding issues of research ethics and protection of the rights of trial participants.

The Sage Resource Project: Readying Researchers to Transform Research through Engagement

The Sage Model enables engagement of older adults receiving Long Term Services and Supports (LTSS), a group typically excluded in research. This presentation focuses on lessons learned from The Sage Resource Project, a Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute funded project. We collaborated with RCMAR and Roybal centers to encourage NIH-affiliated researchers to embrace stakeholder engagement through promotion of the Sage Model. Few studies include an assessment of researcher needs when it comes to stakeholder engagement. We conducted a needs assessment (n=103) finding <50% of researchers presented work to older adults and only 41% interacted with older adults receiving LTSS. However, >90% were likely to attend webinars to learn more. Additionally, 70% of respondents were interested in setting up their own Sage Model research advisory boards. We identify opportunities for transforming LTSS research by including older adults as well as directions for future research on engagement, based on researchers’ identified needs.

Clinical ethics support services during the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK: a cross-sectional survey

BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the need for clinical ethics support provision to ensure as far as possible fair decision making and to address healthcare workers’ moral distress.PurposeTo describe the availability, characteristics and role of clinical ethics support services (CESSs) in the UK during the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodA descriptive cross-sectional online survey was developed by the research team. The survey included questions on CESSs characteristics (model, types of support, guidance development, membership, parent and patient involvement) and changes in response to the pandemic. Invitations to participate were widely circulated via National Health Service institutional emails and relevant clinical ethics groups known to the research team.ResultsBetween October 2020 and June 2021, a total of 53 responses were received. In response to the pandemic, new CESSs were established, and existing provision changed. Most took the form of clinical ethics committees, groups and advisory boards, which varied in size and membership and the body of clinicians and patient populations they served. Some services provided moral distress support and educational provision for clinical staff. During the pandemic, services became more responsive to clinicians’ requests for ethics support and advice. More than half of respondents developed local guidance and around three quarters formed links with regional or other local services. Patient and/or family members’ involvement in ethics discussions is infrequent.ConclusionsThe pandemic has resulted in an expansion in the number of CESSs. Though some may disband as the pandemic eases, the reliance on CESSs during the pandemic demonstrates the need for additional research to better understand the effectiveness of their various forms, connections, guidance, services and modes of working and for better support to enhance consistency, transparency, communication with patients and availability to clinical staff.

Real-World Outcomes for Pediatric and Young Adult Patients with Relapsed or Refractory (R/R) B-Cell Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia (ALL) Treated with Tisagenlecleucel: Update from the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR) Registry

Background: Tisagenlecleucel is an autologous CD19-directed T-cell immunotherapy indicated in the USA for treatment of patients up to 25 years (y) of age with B-cell ALL that is refractory or in second or later relapse. Overall response rate was 82% with 24 months' (mo) follow-up in the registrational ELIANA trial [Grupp et al. Blood 2018]; pooled data from ELIANA and ENSIGN revealed similar outcomes upon stratification by age (<18y and ≥18y) [Rives et al. HemaSphere 2018]. Early real-world data for tisagenlecleucel from the CIBMTR registry reported similar efficacy to ELIANA with no new safety signals [Pasquini et al. Blood Adv 2020]. Outcomes are reported here for patients who received tisagenlecleucel in the real-world setting, stratified by age (<18y and ≥18y). Methods: This noninterventional prospective study used data from the CIBMTR registry and included patients aged ≤25y with R/R ALL. Eligible patients received commercial tisagenlecleucel after August 30, 2017, in the USA or Canada. Age-specific analyses were conducted in patients aged <18y and ≥18y at the time of infusion. Efficacy was assessed in patients with ≥12mo follow-up at each reporting center and included best overall response (BOR) of complete remission (CR), duration of response (DOR), event-free survival (EFS), relapse-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS). Safety was evaluated in all patients who completed the first (100-day) assessment. Adverse events (AEs) of interest - including cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and neurotoxicity - were monitored throughout the reporting period. CRS and neurotoxicity were graded using the ASTCT criteria. Results: As of October 30, 2020, data from 451 patients were collected, all of whom received tisagenlecleucel. The median time from receipt of leukapheresis product at the manufacturing site to shipment was 27 days (interquartile range: 25-34). Patients aged ≥18y appeared to have greater disease burden at baseline than those aged <18y, indicated by lower rates of morphologic CR and minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity prior to infusion. Older patients were also more heavily pre-treated before infusion. All other patient characteristics at baseline were comparable between the two groups (Table 1). In the efficacy set (median follow-up 21.5mo; range 11.9-37.2; N=322), BOR of CR was 87.3% (95% CI 83.1-90.7); MRD status was available for 150 patients, of whom 98.7% were MRD negative. Median DOR was 23.9mo (95% CI 12.3-not estimable [NE]), median EFS was 14.0mo (9.8-24.8) and median RFS was 23.9mo (13.0-NE); 12mo EFS and RFS were 54.3% and 62.3%, respectively. For OS, the median was not reached. Efficacy outcomes were generally similar across age groups (Table 1). In the safety set (median follow-up 20.0mo; range 2.6-37.2; N=400), most AEs of interest occurred within 100 days of infusion. Any-grade CRS was observed in 58.0% of patients; Grade ≥3 in 17.8%. Treatment for CRS included tocilizumab (n=113; 28.3% of all patients) and corticosteroids (n=31; 7.8%). Neurotoxicity was observed in 27.3% of patients; Grade ≥3 in 10.0%. Treatment for neurotoxicity included tocilizumab (n=17; 4.3% of all patients) and corticosteroids (n=28; 7.0%). During the reporting period, 82 (20.5%) patients died; the most common cause of death was recurrence/persistence/progression of primary disease. CRS and chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-T cell-related encephalopathy syndrome were the primary cause of death in 2 patients and 1 patient, respectively. Overall, safety data were similar across age groups, although more patients aged ≥18y experienced any-grade CRS or neurotoxicity and were subsequently treated (Table 1). Conclusions: Updated registry data for pediatric and young adult patients with R/R ALL treated with tisagenlecleucel revealed that patients aged ≥18y had a greater disease burden and were more heavily pre-treated at baseline than patients aged <18y. The overall efficacy and safety profiles of commercial tisagenlecleucel reflected those observed in the clinical trial setting [Grupp et al. Blood 2018; Rives et al. HemaSphere 2018] and were broadly consistent across age groups. Some important differences between the <18y and ≥18y groups were identified, which may point to challenges in timely identification and/or referral of older patients for CAR-T cell therapy. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Pulsipher: Equillium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Adaptive: Research Funding; Jasper Therapeutics: Honoraria. Hu: Kite/Gilead: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Phillips: Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Margossian: Cue Biopharma, Inc.: Current Employment; Novartis: Other: Ad hoc Advisory Boards. Nikiforow: Kite/Gilead: Other: Ad hoc advisory boards; Novartis: Other: Ad hoc advisory boards; Iovance: Other: Ad hoc advisory boards; GlaxoSmithKline (GSK): Other: Ad hoc advisory boards. Martin: Novartis: Other: Local PI for clinical trial; Bluebird Bio: Other: Local PI for clinical trial. Rouce: Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Tessa Therapeutics: Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy. Tiwari: Novartis Healthcare private limited: Current Employment. Redondo: Novartis: Current Employment. Willert: Novartis: Current Employment. Agarwal: Novartis Pharmaceutical Corporation: Current Employment, Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company. Pasquini: Kite Pharma: Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding. Grupp: Novartis, Roche, GSK, Humanigen, CBMG, Eureka, and Janssen/JnJ: Consultancy; Novartis, Kite, Vertex, and Servier: Research Funding; Novartis, Adaptimmune, TCR2, Cellectis, Juno, Vertex, Allogene and Cabaletta: Other: Study steering committees or scientific advisory boards; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Other: Steering committee, Research Funding.

Normal CMR Bi-Atrial and Biventricular Reference Values in Sickle Cell Disease Patients without Heart Damage

Background. Cardiac function indices in patients with hemoglobinopathies are different from those in healthy population, mainly due to chronic anemia. Normal reference values specific for SCD patients are not available by CMR. Aim. We aimed to define the normal cut-off value in SCD patients for bi-atrial and biventricular cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) parameters. Methods. We considered forty-eight adult SCD patients with no known risk factors or cardiac disease, normal electrocardiogram, no macroscopic myocardial fibrosis, and all cardiac segments with T2*≥20 ms, consecutively enrolled in the MIOT network (Myocardial iron overload in thalassemia). SCD patients were compared with ninety-six healthy controls and 96 thalassemia major (TM) patients without cardiac damage, both matched for age and gender. Nine pediatric SCD patients were also analysed in comparison with 9 TM patients and 9 healthy subjects matched for age and gender. Cine images were acquired to quantify biventricular function parameters: LV and RV end-diastolic volume (EDV), end-systolic volume (ESV) and stroke volume (SV) were normalized for body surface area (EDVI, ESVI, SVI), as well as biventricular mass and atrial areas. Myocardial iron overload was assessed by segmental T2* technique. Late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) images were acquired for evaluation of macroscopic myocardial fibrosis. Results. In all three groups males showed higher biventricular volumes and mass indexes than females. SCD male patients had significantly higher LVEDVI (p<0.0001), LVESVI (p=0.010), LVSVI (p=0.003), cardiac index (p=0.002), LV and RV mass index (p=0.008 and p=0.001, respectively) and left and right atrial areas (p<0.001 and p=0.011) than healthy subjects. No significant differences were found in RVEDVI, EVESVI and biventricular EF. Compared to healthy volunteers, females with SCD showed a larger LVEDVI (p=0.020), LVSVI (p=0.039), RV mass index (p=0.002) and left atrial area (p=0.008). SCD and TM patients showed comparable values of bi-atrial and biventricular volumes and function. When compared to TM, SCD patients showed a larger LV (p<0.001) and RV mass index (p=0.001) in male group and a larger RV mass index (p=0.001) in female group. Table 1 shows the cut-offs for bi-atrial and biventricular MR parameters for adult SCD patients by gender. No significant differences in MR parameters were found among the pediatric groups. Conclusions. Normal reference ranges of bi-atrial and biventricular MR parameters for adult males and females SCD patients were established. The use of these reference values will prevent possible misdiagnosis of cardiomyopathy in patients with SCD. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Pepe: Chiesi Farmaceutici S.p.A: Other: no profit support; Bayer S.p.A.: Other: no profit support. Quarta: Sanofi - Genzyme: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: collaboration relationships for Advisory boards, Webinar events, editorial projects; Speaker at conferences; Blue Bird Bio: Other: collaboration relationships for Advisory boards, Webinar events, editorial projects; Celgene: Other: collaboration relationships for Advisory boards, Webinar events, editorial projects; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: collaboration relationships for Advisory boards, Webinar events, editorial projects; Speaker at conferences; Takeda: Other: collaboration relationships for Advisory boards, Webinar events, editorial projects; speaker at conferences; Bristol Meyer Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Speaker at conferences. Maggio: Bluebird Bio: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene Corp: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.