Efficient design of clinical trials and epidemiological research: Is it possible?

Nature Reviews Cardiology

Volumn 14, Issue 8, 2017, Pages 493-501

  Lauer, Michael S ^a   Gordon, David ^b   Wei, Gina ^b   Pearson, Gail ^b  

^a NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH   (United States)

^b NATIONAL HEART LUNG AND BLOOD INSTITUTE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANONYMIZATION; AWARDS AND PRIZES; CLINICAL PROTOCOL; CLINICAL RESEARCH; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONFIDENTIALITY; COST CONTROL; DRUG INDUSTRY; ELECTRONIC HEALTH RECORD; EPIDEMIOLOGICAL DATA; FUNDING; HEALTH CARE ORGANIZATION; HUMAN; PATIENT AUTONOMY; PATIENT PARTICIPATION; PATIENT SAFETY; PHYSICIAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PRIVACY; REGISTER; RESEARCH SUBJECT; REVIEW; STUDY DESIGN; WORKFLOW; CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASE; CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); COST; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; ECONOMICS; METHODOLOGY; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; PROCEDURES; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA; TRENDS;

CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASES; CLINICAL TRIALS AS TOPIC; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; COSTS AND COST ANALYSIS; EPIDEMIOLOGIC STUDIES; HUMANS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; RESEARCH DESIGN;

EID: 85018323877     PISSN: 17595002     EISSN: 17595010     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/nrcardio.2017.60     Document Type: Review

References (110)

1. Sundström, J. et al. Blood pressure-lowering treatment based on cardiovascular risk: a meta-analysis of individual patient data. Lancet 384, 591-598 (2014).
2. Mihaylova, B. et al. The effects of lowering LDL cholesterol with statin therapy in people at low risk of vascular disease: meta-analysis of individual data from 27 randomised trials. Lancet 380, 581-590 (2012).
3. Baigent, C. et al. Efficacy and safety of more intensive lowering of LDL cholesterol: a meta analysis of data from 170000 participants in 26 randomised trials. Lancet 376, 1670-1681 (2010).
4. Anthonisen, N. R. et al. The effects of a smoking cessation intervention on 14.5-year mortality: a randomized clinical trial. Ann. Intern. Med. 142, 233-239 (2005).
5. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Aspirin for the prevention of cardiovascular disease: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann. Intern. Med. 150, 396-404 (2009).
6. Cutler, D. M. & Kadiyala, S. in Measuring the Gains from Medical Research: an Economic Approach (eds Murphy, K. M. & Topel, R. H.) 110-162 (Univ. of Chicago Press, 2003).
7. Ford, E. S. et al. Explaining the decrease in U.S. deaths from coronary disease, 1980-2000. N. Engl. J. Med. 356, 2388-2398 (2007).
8. Eisenstein, E. L. et al. Sensible approaches for reducing clinical trial costs. Clin. Trials 5, 75-84 (2008).
9. Yusuf, S. Transforming the scientific, health care, and sociopolitical culture of an entire country through clinical research: the story of GISSI. Am. Heart J. 148, 193-195 (2004).
10. Antman, E. M. & Harrington, R. A. Transforming clinical trials in cardiovascular disease: mission critical for health and economic well-being. JAMA 308, 1743-1744 (2012).
11. Heart Protection Study Collaborative Group. MRC/BHF Heart Protection Study of cholesterol lowering with simvastatin in 20,536 high-risk individuals: a randomised placebo-controlled trial. Lancet 360, 7-22 (2002).
12. Tavazzi, L., Maggioni, A. P. & Tognoni, G. Participation versus education: the GISSI story and beyond. Am. Heart J. 148, 222-229 (2004).
13. Sertkaya, A., Birkenbach, A., Berlind, A. & Eyraud, J. Examination of clinical trial costs and barriers for drug development. Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation https://aspe.hhs.gov/system/files/pdf/77166/rpt-erg.pdf (2014).
14. Berndt, E. R. & Cockburn, I. M. Price indexes for clinical trial research: a feasibility study. National Bureau of Economic Research http://www.nber.org/papers/w18918.pdf (2013).
15. Califf, R. M. Clinical trials bureaucracy: unintended consequences of well-intentioned policy. Clin. Trials 3, 496-502 (2006).
16. Getz, K. Improving protocol design feasibility to drive drug development economics and performance. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 11, 5069-5080 (2014).
17. Devereaux, P. J. & Yusuf, S. When it comes to trials, do we get what we pay for? N. Engl. J. Med. 369, 1962-1963 (2013).
18. Kramer, J. M., Smith, P. B. & Califf, R. M. Impediments to clinical research in the United States. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 91, 535-541 (2012).
19. Roy, A. S. A. Stifling new cures: the true cost of lengthy clinical drug trials. Manhattan Institute https://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/stifling-new-cures-true-cost-lengthy-clinical-drug-trials-6013.html (2012).
20. Moses, H. et al. The anatomy of medical research. JAMA 313, 174-189 (2015).
21. Jenkins, J. K. CDER new drug review: 2016 update. U.S. Food and Drug Administration https://www.fda.gov/downloads/AboutFDA/CentersOffices/OfficeofMedicalProductsandTobacco/CDER/UCM533192.pdf (2016).
22. Kramer, J. M. & Schulman, K. A. in Envisioning a Transformed Clinical Trials Enterprise in the United States: Establishing an Agenda for 2020: Workshop Summary 183-192 (National Academies Press, 2012).
23. Lauer, M. S. Time for a creative transformation of epidemiology in the United States. JAMA 308, 1804-1805 (2012).
24. Khoury, M. J. et al. Transforming epidemiology for 21st century medicine and public health. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev. 22, 508-516 (2013).
25. Landrigan, P. J. & Baker, D. B. The National Children''s Study - end or new beginning? N. Engl. J. Med. 372, 1486-1487 (2015).
26. Tricoci, P. et al. Scientific evidence underlying the ACC/AHA clinical practice guidelines. JAMA 301, 831-841 (2009).
27. Lauer, M. S. A policy for science. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 59, 2154-2156 (2012).
28. Califf, R. M. et al. Transforming evidence generation to support health and health care decisions. N. Engl. J. Med. 375, 2395-2400 (2016).
29. Scannell, J. W., Blanckley, A., Boldon, H. & Warrington, B. Diagnosing the decline in pharmaceutical R & D efficiency. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 11, 191-200 (2012).
30. Hudson, K., Lauer, M. & Collins, F. Toward a new era of trust and transparency in clinical trials. JAMA 316, 1353-1354 (2016).
31. Button, K. S. et al. Power failure: why small sample size undermines the reliability of neuroscience. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 14, 365-376 (2013).
32. Ross, J. S. et al. Publication of NIH funded trials registered in ClinicalTrials.gov: cross sectional analysis. BMJ 344, d7292 (2012).
33. Chen, R. et al. Publication and reporting of clinical trial results: cross sectional analysis across academic medical centers. BMJ 352 i637 (2016).
34. Gordon, D. J. & Lauer, M. S. Publication of trials funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. N. Engl. J. Med. 370, 782 (2014).
35. Gordon, D., Cooper-Arnold, K., Lauer, M., Cooper-Arnold, K. & Lauer, M. Publication speed, reporting metrics, and citation impact of cardiovascular trials supported by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. J. Am. Heart Assoc. 4, e002292 (2015).
36. Mullard, A. NIH tackles clinical trial shortcomings. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 15, 297-298 (2016).
37. Lyubarova, R., Itagaki, B. K. & Itagaki, M. W. The impact of National Institutes of Health funding on U.S. cardiovascular disease research. PLoS ONE 4, e6425 (2009).
38. Sertkaya, A., Wong, H.-H., Jessup, A. & Beleche, T. Key cost drivers of pharmaceutical clinical trials in the United States. Clin. Trials 13, 117-126 (2016).
39. Eapen, Z. J., Lauer, M. S. & Temple, R. J. The imperative of overcoming barriers to the conduct of large, simple trials. JAMA 311, 1397-1398 (2014).
40. Udell, J. A. et al. Clinical trial participation after myocardial infarction in a national cardiovascular data registry. JAMA 312, 841-843 (2014).
41. Schaefer, G. O., Emanuel, E. J. & Wertheimer, A. The obligation to participate in biomedical research. JAMA 302, 67-72 (2009).
42. Murthy, V. H., Krumholz, H. M. & Gross, C. P. Participation in cancer clinical trials: race-, sex-, and age-based disparities. JAMA 291, 2720-2726 (2004).
43. Brownlee, S. & Winters, D. Bad science and breast cancer. Discover Magazine http://discovermagazine.com/2002/aug/featbad (2002).
44. Marshall, E. A. Medicine. A bruising battle over lung scans. Science 320, 600-603 (2008).
45. Califf, R. M. Clinical research sites - the underappreciated component of the clinical research system. JAMA 302, 2025-2027 (2009).
46. Mailankody, S. & Prasad, V. Comparative effectiveness questions in oncology. N. Engl. J. Med. 370, 1478-1481 (2014).
47. Tufts Center for Drug Development. Tufts CSDD impact report. Current investigator landscape poses a growing challenge for sponsors. Tufts University http://csdd.tufts.edu/reports/purchase-single-impact- report?issue=Vol11%20No1 (2009).
48. Institute of Medicine (US) Forum on Drug Discovery, Development, and Translation, English, R., Lebovitz, Y. & Giffin, R. Transforming Clinical Research in the United States: Challenges and Opportunities: Workshop Summary (National Academies Press, 2010).
49. Gordon, D. et al. Publication of trials funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. N. Engl. J. Med. 369, 1926-1934 (2013).
50. Djulbegovic, B., Kumar, A., Glasziou, P., Miladinovic, B. & Chalmers, I. Medical research: trial unpredictability yields predictable therapy gains. Nature 500, 395-396 (2013).
51. National Institutes of Health. US GAO-16-304 report. Additional data would enhance the stewardship of clinical trials across the agency. U.S. Government Accountability Office http://www.gao.gov/assets/680/675711.pdf (2016).
52. National Institutes of Health. CTSA consortium tackling clinical trial recruitment roadblocks. National Institutes of Health https://ncats.nih.gov/pubs/features/ctsa-act (2015).
53. SMART IRB. About SMART IRB. https://smartirb.org/about-us/(2016).
54. van Staa, T.-P. et al. The opportunities and challenges of pragmatic point-of-care randomised trials using routinely collected electronic records: evaluations of two exemplar trials. Health Technol. Assess. 18, 1-146 (2014).
55. Califf, R. M., Sanderson, I. & Miranda, M. L. The future of cardiovascular clinical research: informatics, clinical investigators, and community engagement. JAMA 308, 1747-1748 (2012).
56. Fiore, L. D. et al. A point-of-care clinical trial comparing insulin administered using a sliding scale versus a weight-based regimen. Clin. Trials 8, 183-195 (2011).
57. Collins, F. S., Hudson, K. L., Briggs, J. P. & Lauer, M. S. PCORnet: turning a dream into reality. J. Am. Med. Inf. Assoc. 21, 576-577 (2014).
58. Frobert, O. et al. Thrombus aspiration in ST-elevation myocardial infarction in Scandinavia (TASTE trial). A multicenter, prospective, randomized, controlled clinical registry trial based on the Swedish angiography and angioplasty registry (SCAAR) platform. Study design and rationale. Am. Heart. J. 160, 1042-1048 (2010).
59. Frobert, O. et al. Thrombus aspiration during ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. N. Engl. J. Med. 369, 1587-1597 (2013).
60. Jolly, S. S. et al. Randomized trial of primary PCI with or without routine manual thrombectomy. N. Engl. J. Med. 372, 1389-1398 (2015).
61. Lauer, M. S. & D''Agostino, R. B. The randomized registry trial - the next disruptive technology in clinical research? N. Engl. J. Med. 369, 1579-1581 (2013).
62. Gulliford, M. C. et al. Electronic health records for intervention research: a cluster randomized trial to reduce antibiotic prescribing in primary care (eCRT Study). Ann. Fam. Med. 12, 344-351 (2014).
63. Gulliford, M. C. et al. Cluster randomized trials utilizing primary care electronic health records: methodological issues in design, conduct, and analysis (eCRT Study). Trials 15, 220 (2014).
64. Dregan, A. et al. Point-of-care cluster randomized trial in stroke secondary prevention using electronic health records. Stroke 45, 2066-2071 (2014).
65. Dregan, A. et al. Cluster randomized trial in the general practice research database: 2. secondary prevention after first stroke (eCRT Study): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials 13, 181 (2012).
66. Rao, S. V. et al. A registry-based randomized trial comparing radial and femoral approaches in women undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: the SAFE-PCI for Women (Study of Access Site for Enhancement of PCI for Women) trial. JACC Cardiovasc. Interv. 7, 857-867 (2014).
67. Califf, R. M. & Platt, R. Embedding cardiovascular research into practice. JAMA 310, 2037-2038 (2013).
68. NIH Collaboratory. Demonstration projects. NIH Collaboratory https://www.nihcollaboratory.org/demonstration-projects/Pages/default.aspx (2016).
69. VITAL. The VITamin D and OmegA-3 TriaL. VITAL http://www.vitalstudy.org (2016).
70. Christiansen, E. H. et al. Biolimus-eluting biodegradable polymer-coated stent versus durable polymer-coated sirolimus-eluting stent in unselected patients receiving percutaneous coronary intervention (SORT OUT V): a randomised non-inferiority trial. Lancet 381, 661-669 (2013).
71. Frank, L. Epidemiology. When an entire country is a cohort. Science 287, 2398-2399 (2000).
72. Andersen, T. F., Madsen, M., Jørgensen, J., Mellemkjoer, L. & Olsen, J. H. The Danish National Hospital Register. A valuable source of data for modern health sciences. Dan. Med. Bull. 46, 263-268 (1999).
73. Hernandez, A. F., Fleurence, R. L. & Rothman, R. L. The ADAPTABLE trial and PCORnet: shining light on a new research paradigm. Ann. Intern. Med. http://dx.doi.org/10.7326/M15-1460 (2015).
74. Heddle, N. M. et al. Effect of short-term versus long-term blood storage on mortality after transfusion. N. Engl. J. Med. 375, 1937-1945 (2016).
75. Boden, W. E. et al. Niacin in patients with low HDL cholesterol levels receiving intensive statin therapy. N. Engl. J. Med. 365, 2255-2267 (2011).
76. Choudhry, N. K. et al. Full coverage for preventive medications after myocardial infarction. N. Engl. J. Med. 365, 2088-2097 (2011).
77. Huang, S. S. et al. Targeted versus universal decolonization to prevent ICU infection. N. Engl. J. Med. 368, 2255-2265 (2013).
78. Wilber, D. J. et al. Comparison of antiarrhythmic drug therapy and radiofrequency catheter ablation in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 303, 333-340 (2010).
79. Stern, A. D., Alexander, B. M. & Chandra, A. How economics can shape precision medicines. Science 355, 1131-1133 (2017).
80. Pitt, B. et al. Spironolactone for heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. N. Engl. J. Med. 370, 1383-1392 (2014).
81. McMurray, J. J. V. & O''Connor, C. Lessons from the TOPCAT Trial. N. Engl. J. Med. 370, 1453-1454 (2014).
82. Pfeffer, M. A. et al. Regional variation in patients and outcomes in the treatment of preserved cardiac function heart failure with an aldosterone antagonist (TOPCAT) trial. Circulation 131, 34-42 (2015).
83. Manolio, T. A. & Collins, R. Enhancing the feasibility of large cohort studies. JAMA 304, 2290-2291 (2010).
84. Gaziano, J. M. et al. Million Veteran Program: a mega-biobank to study genetic influences on health and disease. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 70, 214-223 (2016).
85. Selby, J. V., Krumholz, H. M., Kuntz, R. E. & Collins, F. S. Network news: powering clinical research. Sci. Transl Med. 5, 182fs13 (2013).
86. Precision Medicine Initiative (PMI) Working Group. The Precision Medicine Initiative cohort program - building a research foundation for 21st century medicine. National Institutes of Health https://www. nih.gov/sites/default/files/research-training/initiatives/pmi/pmi-working-group-report-20150917-2.pdf (2015).
87. Collins, F. S. & Varmus, H. A. New initiative on precision medicine. N. Engl. J. Med. 372, 793-795 (2015).
88. Sorlie, P. D., Bild, D. E. & Lauer, M. S. Cardiovascular epidemiology in a changing world - challenges to investigators and the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. Am. J. Epidemiol. 175, 597-601 (2012).
89. Fabsitz, R. R. et al. Impact of National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute-supported cardiovascular epidemiology research, 1998 to 2012. Circulation 132, 2028-2033 (2015).
90. Roger, V. L. et al. Strategic transformation of population studies: recommendations of the working group on epidemiology and population sciences From the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Advisory Council and Board of External Experts. Am. J. Epidemiol. 181, 363-368 (2015).
91. Riley, W., Nilsen, W., Manolio, T., Masys, D. & Lauer, M. News from the NIH: potential contributions of the behavioral and social sciences to the precision medicine initiative. Transl Behav. Med. 5, 243-246 (2015).
92. Hlatky, M. A. et al. Use of Medicare data to identify coronary heart disease outcomes in the Women''s Health Initiative. Circ. Cardiovasc. Qual. Outcomes 7, 157-162 (2014).
93. Ball, R., Robb, M., Anderson, S. A. & Dal Pan, G. The FDA''s sentinel initiative - a comprehensive approach to medical product surveillance. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 99, 265-268 (2016).
94. Gliklich, R. E., Dreyer, N. A. & Leavy, M. B. (eds) Registries for Evaluating Patient Outcomes: A User''s Guide 3rd edn (Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US), 2014).
95. National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute. Accrual of human subjects (milestones) policy. National Institutes of Health http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/research/funding/human-subjects/accrual-guidelines (2009).
96. Hofmann, R. et al. Determination of the role of oxygen in suspected acute myocardial infarction (DETO2X-AMI trial). Am. Heart J. 167, 322-328 (2013).
97. Luce, B. R. et al. Rethinking randomized clinical trials for comparative effectiveness research: the need for transformational change. Ann. Intern. Med. 151, 206-209 (2009).
98. Meurer, W. J. & Lewis, R. J. Cluster randomized trials: evaluating treatments applied to groups. JAMA 313, 2068-2069 (2015).
99. Ervin, A.-M., Taylor, H. A. & Ehrhardt, S. NIH policy on single-IRB review - a new era in multicenter studies. N. Engl. J. Med. 375, 2315-2317 (2016).
100. Fleurence, R. L. et al. Engaging patients and stakeholders in research proposal review: the patient-centered outcomes research institute. Ann. Intern. Med. 161, 122-130 (2014).
101. Peters-Lawrence, M. H. et al. Clinical trial implementation and recruitment: lessons learned from the early closure of a randomized clinical trial. Contemp. Clin. Trials 33, 291-297 (2012).
102. Ioannidis, J. P. More time for research: fund people not projects. Nature 477, 529-531 (2011).
103. Ioannidis, J. P. & Khoury, M. J. Assessing value in biomedical research: the PQRST of appraisal and reward. JAMA 312, 483-484 (2014).
104. Wagner, T. H., Murray, C., Goldberg, J., Adler, J. M. & Abrams, J. Costs and benefits of the National Cancer Institute central institutional review board. J. Clin. Oncol. 28, 662-666 (2010).
105. Zarin, D. A., Tse, T., Williams, R. J. & Carr, S. Trial reporting in ClinicalTrials.gov - the final rule. N. Engl. J. Med. 375, 1998-2004 (2016).
106. Ioannidis, J. P. Contradicted and initially stronger effects in highly cited clinical research. JAMA 294, 218-228 (2005).
107. Taichman, D. B. et al. Sharing clinical trial data - a proposal from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. N. Engl. J. Med. 374, 384-386 (2016).
108. Warren, E. Strengthening research through data sharing. N. Engl. J. Med. 375, 401-403 (2016).
109. International Consortium of Investigators for Fairness in Trial Data Sharing. Toward fairness in data sharing. N. Engl. J. Med. 375, 405-407 (2016).
110. Krumholz, H. M. & Waldstreicher, J. The Yale Open Data Access (YODA) Project - a mechanism for data sharing. N. Engl. J. Med. 375, 403-405 (2016).