| Literature DB >> 15829477 |
James Paul1, Rachael Seib, Todd Prescott.
Abstract
Both the Internet and clinical trials were significant developments in the latter half of the twentieth century: the Internet revolutionized global communications and the randomized controlled trial provided a means to conduct an unbiased comparison of two or more treatments. Large multicenter trials are often burdened with an extensive development time and considerable expense, as well as significant challenges in obtaining, backing up and analyzing large amounts of data. Alongside the increasing complexities of the modern clinical trial has grown the power of the Internet to improve communications, centralize and secure data as well as to distribute information. As more and more clinical trials are required to coordinate multiple trial processes in real time, centers are turning to the Internet for the tools to manage the components of a clinical trial, either in whole or in part, to produce lower costs and faster results. This paper reviews the historical development of the Internet and the randomized controlled trial, describes the Internet resources available that can be used in a clinical trial, reviews some examples of online trials and describes the advantages and disadvantages of using the Internet to conduct a clinical trial. We also extract the characteristics of the 5 largest clinical trials conducted using the Internet to date, which together enrolled over 26000 patients.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2005 PMID: 15829477 PMCID: PMC1550630 DOI: 10.2196/jmir.7.1.e5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Med Internet Res ISSN: 1438-8871 Impact factor: 5.428
Figure 1Cumulative number of randomized control trials (RCTs) versus online RCTs (based on Medline and Old Medline searches from 1950) on a logarithmic scale over time
Summary of Internet resources for clinical trials
| Canadian Institutes of Health Research | |
| US National Institutes of Health | |
| UK Medical Research Council | |
| Bibliographic Databases | |
| National Library of Medicine - Medline | |
| The Cochrane Collaboration – The Cochrane Library | |
| Elsevier Science – Bibliographic Databases | |
| National Institutes of Health – ClinicalTrials.gov | |
| Current Controlled Trials - | |
| Veritas Medicine Inc. | |
| Centerwatch Clinical Trials Listing Service | |
| Directory of Randomization Services | |
| Randomization.com | |
| Paradigm | |
| Simple Interactive Statistical Analysis – SISA | |
| Statpages.net | |
| Free Medical Journals | |
| Directory of Open Access Journals | |
Figure 2Example of a 3-tier architecture in an online clinical trial system
Examples of clinical trials conducted using the Internet
| Lower Pole Renal Calculi | Urology | 2004 | [ | ||||||
| Growth Restriction Intervention Trial (GRIT) | Obstetrics | 1996 | [ | ||||||
| International Verapamil SR/Trandolapril Study (INVEST) | Cardiology | 1997 | [ | ||||||
| Osteoarthritis of the Knee: Trial of Glucosamine | Orthopedics | 2000 | [ | ||||||
| Intraoperative Anti-infective Prophylaxis | Ophthalmology | 2001 | [ | ||||||
| Study centers | 21 centers in North America | 69 centers in 13 European countries | 862 centers in 14 countries | Single center | Various centers in Germany | ||||
| Methodology | Multicenter randomized controlled trial | Multicenter randomized controlled trial | Multicenter randomized controlled trial | Double blind randomized controlled trial | Multicenter controlled trial | ||||
| Population | Adults with lower pole renal calculi | Primary physician uncertain whether a growth restricted baby should be delivered or not | Adults with coronary artery disease and hypertension | Adult patients with osteoarthritis of the knee. | Adult patients undergoing elective cataract surgery | ||||
| Sample size | 112 | 548 | 22576 | 205 | 4000 to date | ||||
| Intervention | Shock wave lithotripsy, percutaneous nephrolithotomy and retrograde ureteroscopic stone manipulation | Early delivery versus delayed delivery | Antihypertensive therapy with verapamil versus atenolol/hydrocholorothiazide | Glucosamine versus placebo | Irrigation with gentamicin versus regular irrigation | ||||
| Outcomes | Stone removal | Perinatal mortality and developmental quotient at 2 years | Adverse outcomes: all-cause mortality, nonfatal MI, or nonfatal stroke | WOMAC pain scores | Postoperative endopthalmitis | ||||
| Online protocol | • | • | • | • | |||||
| Online registration | • | • | • | • | |||||
| Online randomization | • | • | • | • | |||||
| Online data collection | • | • | • | • | • | ||||
| Email communication | • | • | • | • | |||||
| Data server Fifrewall | • | • | |||||||
| Confidential website | • | • | • | • | • | ||||
| User IDs / passwords | • | • | • | • | |||||
| Encrypted transmission | • | • | |||||||
| Other | Website requires a 6-digit code assigned by an RSA SecurID key fob | No patient identifying data sent online, but by more secure means | Online ordering of study medications | Automated reminder emails and personalized schedules | No patient identifying data sent online | ||||
* The year that the trial was started.
† “•” Denotes that the feature was present in the trial. If the “•” is absent, the feature was not present or was not documented in the protocol.
Advantages and disadvantages of using the Internet to conduct clinical trials
| Communication | • Email and website notices make exchange of information less expensive, faster and easier | • Online communications are not as secure as more traditional means (telephone, fax and mail) |
| Feasibility | • No need for special hardware or software at participating centers | • Risk of selection bias if all study centers are required to have Internet access |
| Training | • Online training resources allow for easily accessible and flexible programs for investigators | • Online training may not be as effective as a live educator |
| Patient recruitment | • Cost-effective broadcast medium to advertise a study to potential participants and study centers | • Some patients and study centers may decline involvement because of concerns over the security of online data |
| Randomization | • Eliminates the need and expense of a 24-hour call-in center for registration and randomization. | •It is harder to locate a computer terminal than a telephone at the point of patient contact |
| Data collection | • Enables real-time data validation | • Data input could be slowed down during times of peak Internet use when access to the Web server is slowed |
| Monitoring | • Study monitors have real-time access to all aspects of the trial activity | • With less frequent in-person site monitoring some problems may take much longer to be identified |
| Safety | • Internal Review Board (IRB) has real-time access to adverse events | |
| Security | • Sensitive patient data is centralized in one location which simplifies security management | • Online data can be intercepted during transmission or accessed from the database server if security measures are not sufficient |
| Study personnel | • Fewer data entry personnel required | • Requires experienced computer professionals to set up and maintain an online clinical trial system |
| Administration | • Reduction or elimination of paper reporting | • Because of the expense of developing an online trial system it may not be feasible for smaller trials |