Literature DB >> 19254936

A web-based endpoint adjudication system for interim analyses in clinical trials.

Tracy L Nolen1, Bill F Dimmick, Luis Ostrosky-Zeichner, Amy S Kendrick, Carole Sable, Angela Ngai, Dennis Wallace.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: A data monitoring committee (DMC) is often employed to assess trial progress and review safety data and efficacy endpoints throughout a trail. Interim analyses performed for the DMC should use data that are as complete and verified as possible. Such analyses are complicated when data verification involves subjective study endpoints or requires clinical expertise to determine each subject's status with respect to the study endpoint. Therefore, procedures are needed to obtain adjudicated data for interim analyses in an efficient manner. In the past, methods for handling such data included using locally reported results as surrogate endpoints, adjusting analysis methods for unadjudicated data, or simply performing the adjudication as rapidly as possible. These methods all have inadequacies that make their sole usage suboptimal.
PURPOSE: For a study of prophylaxis for invasive candidiasis, adjudication of both study eligibility criteria and clinical endpoints prior to two interim analyses was required. Because the study was expected to enroll at a moderate rate and the sponsor required adjudicated endpoints to be used for interim analyses, an efficient process for adjudication was required.
METHODS: We created a web-based endpoint adjudication system (WebEAS) that allows for expedited review by the endpoint adjudication committee (EAC). This system automatically identifies when a subject's data are complete, creates a subject profile from the study data, and assigns EAC reviewers. The reviewers use the WebEAS to review the subject profile and submit their completed review form. The WebEAS then compares the reviews, assigns an additional review as a tiebreaker if needed, and stores the adjudicated data.
RESULTS: The study for which this system was originally built was administratively closed after 10 months with only 38 subjects enrolled. The adjudication process was finalized and the WebEAS system activated prior to study closure. Some website accessibility issues presented initially. However, once these issues were resolved, the reviewers found the system user-friendly and easy to navigate. LIMITATIONS: Web-based data adjudication depends upon expeditious data collection and verification. Further, ability to use web-based technologies, in addition to clinical expertise, must be considered in selecting EAC members.
CONCLUSION: The automated nature of this system makes it a practical mechanism for ensuring timely endpoint adjudication. The authors believe a similar approach could be useful for handling endpoint adjudication for future clinical trials.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19254936      PMCID: PMC3000902          DOI: 10.1177/1740774508100975

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Trials        ISSN: 1740-7745            Impact factor:   2.486


  11 in total

1.  Adjusting survival analysis for the presence of unadjudicated study events.

Authors:  T D Cook
Journal:  Control Clin Trials       Date:  2000-06

Review 2.  Procedures of data and safety monitoring committees.

Authors:  S Pocock; C D Furberg
Journal:  Am Heart J       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 4.749

3.  Outcomes ascertainment and adjudication methods in the Women's Health Initiative.

Authors:  J David Curb; Anne McTiernan; Susan R Heckbert; Charles Kooperberg; Janet Stanford; Michael Nevitt; Karen C Johnson; Lori Proulx-Burns; Lisa Pastore; Michael Criqui; Sandra Daugherty
Journal:  Ann Epidemiol       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 3.797

Review 4.  The challenges of conducting clinical endpoint studies.

Authors:  Jonathan L Isaacsohn; Tiffany A Khodadad; Catherine Soldano-Noble; Jeffrey D Vest
Journal:  Curr Atheroscler Rep       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 5.113

5.  Internet in clinical research based on a pilot experience.

Authors:  Carmen López-Carrero; Elena Arriaza; Elena Bolaños; Antonio Ciudad; Marco Municio; José Ramos; Wout Hesen
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 2.226

6.  Adjusted Kaplan-Meier estimator and log-rank test with inverse probability of treatment weighting for survival data.

Authors:  Jun Xie; Chaofeng Liu
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2005-10-30       Impact factor: 2.373

7.  An extension of stochastic curtailment for incompletely reported and classified recurrent events: the Multicenter Study of Hydroxyurea in Sickle Cell Anemia (MSH).

Authors:  R P McMahon; M A Waclawiw; N L Geller; F B Barton; M L Terrin; D R Bonds
Journal:  Control Clin Trials       Date:  1997-10

8.  Is the future for clinical trials internet-based? A cluster randomized clinical trial.

Authors:  Jennifer Litchfield; Jenny Freeman; Henrik Schou; Mark Elsley; Robert Fuller; Barrie Chubb
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 2.486

9.  The impact of an end-point committee in a large multicentre, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial: results with and without the end-point committee's final decision on end-points.

Authors:  U Näslund; L Grip; J Fischer-Hansen; T Gundersen; S Lehto; L Wallentin
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  1999-05       Impact factor: 29.983

10.  Disagreements between central clinical events committee and site investigator assessments of myocardial infarction endpoints in an international clinical trial: review of the PURSUIT study.

Authors:  Kenneth W Mahaffey; Robert A Harrington; Martijn Akkerhuis; Neal S Kleiman; Lisa G Berdan; Brian S Crenshaw; Barbara E Tardiff; Christopher B Granger; Ingrid DeJong; Manju Bhapkar; Petr Widimsky; Ramón Corbalon; Kerry L Lee; Jaap W Deckers; Maarten L Simoons; Eric J Topol; Robert M Califf
Journal:  Curr Control Trials Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2001-07-17
View more
  2 in total

1.  The importance of an independent oversight committee to preserve treatment fidelity, ensure protocol compliance, and adjudicate safety endpoints in the ATACH II trial.

Authors:  Na McBee; Df Hanley; Cs Kase; K Lane; Jr Carhuapoma
Journal:  J Vasc Interv Neurol       Date:  2012-08

2.  Architecture design of a generic centralized adjudication module integrated in a web-based clinical trial management system.

Authors:  Wenle Zhao; Keith Pauls
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2015-10-13       Impact factor: 2.486

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.