Literature DB >> 23776198

Implementation of timeline reforms speeds initiation of National Cancer Institute-sponsored trials.

Jeffrey S Abrams1, Margaret M Mooney, James A Zwiebel, Edward L Korn, Steven H Friedman, Shanda R Finnigan, Patricia R Schettino, Andrea M Denicoff, Martha G Kruhm, Mike Montello, R Rita Misra, Sherry S Ansher, Kate J DiPiazza, Erin M Souhan, D Lawrence Wickerham, Bruce J Giantonio, Robert T O'Donnell, Daniel M Sullivan, Nancy I Soto, Gini F Fleming, Sheila A Prindiville, Ray A Petryshyn, Judith A Hautala, Oren Grad, Brian L Zuckerman, Ralph M Meyer, James C Yao, Laurence A Baker, Jan C Buckner, Gabriel N Hortobagyi, James H Doroshow.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The National Cancer Institute (NCI) organized the Operational Efficiency Working Group in 2008 to develop recommendations for improving the speed with which NCI-sponsored clinical trials move from the idea stage to a protocol open to patient enrollment.
METHODS: Given the many stakeholders involved, the Operational Efficiency Working Group advised a multifaceted approach to mobilize the entire research community to improve their business processes. New staff positions to monitor progress, protocol-tracking Web sites, and strategically planned conference calls were implemented. NCI staff and clinical teams at Cooperative Groups and Cancer Centers strived to achieve new target timelines but, most important, agreed to abide by absolute deadlines. For phase I-II studies and phase III studies, the target timelines are 7 months and 10 months, whereas the absolute deadlines were set at 18 and 24 months, respectively. Trials not activated by the absolute deadline are automatically disapproved.
RESULTS: The initial experience is encouraging and indicates a reduction in development times for phase I-II studies from the historical median of 541 days to a median of 442 days, an 18.3% decrease. The experience with phase III studies to date, although more limited (n = 25), demonstrates a 45.7% decrease in median days.
CONCLUSIONS: Based upon this progress, the NCI and the investigator community have agreed to reduce the absolute deadlines to 15 and 18 months for phase I-II and III trials, respectively. Emphasis on initiating trials rapidly is likely to help reduce the time it takes for clinical trial results to reach patients in need of new treatments.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23776198      PMCID: PMC3699438          DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djt137

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst        ISSN: 0027-8874            Impact factor:   13.506


  6 in total

1.  A national cancer clinical trials system for the 21st century: reinvigorating the NCI Cooperative Group Program.

Authors:  John F Scoggins; Scott D Ramsey
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2010-08-03       Impact factor: 13.506

2.  The paradoxical problem with multiple-IRB review.

Authors:  Jerry Menikoff
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2010-10-13       Impact factor: 91.245

3.  Reforming the regulations governing research with human subjects.

Authors:  Ezekiel J Emanuel; Jerry Menikoff
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2011-07-25       Impact factor: 91.245

4.  A sense of urgency: Evaluating the link between clinical trial development time and the accrual performance of cancer therapy evaluation program (NCI-CTEP) sponsored studies.

Authors:  Steven K Cheng; Mary S Dietrich; David M Dilts
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2010-11-09       Impact factor: 12.531

5.  Phase III clinical trial development: a process of chutes and ladders.

Authors:  David M Dilts; Steven K Cheng; Joshua S Crites; Alan B Sandler; James H Doroshow
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2010-11-09       Impact factor: 12.531

6.  Costs and benefits of the national cancer institute central institutional review board.

Authors:  Todd H Wagner; Christine Murray; Jacquelyn Goldberg; Jeanne M Adler; Jeffrey Abrams
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2009-10-19       Impact factor: 44.544

  6 in total
  13 in total

1.  The Rare Diseases Clinical Research Network's organization and approach to observational research and health outcomes research.

Authors:  Jeffrey P Krischer; Rashmi Gopal-Srivastava; Stephen C Groft; David J Eckstein
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2014-08       Impact factor: 5.128

2.  Clinical Trial Characteristics and Barriers to Participant Accrual: The MD Anderson Cancer Center Experience over 30 years, a Historical Foundation for Trial Improvement.

Authors:  Chad Tang; Steven I Sherman; Mellanie Price; Jun Weng; Suzanne E Davis; David S Hong; James C Yao; Aman Buzdar; George Wilding; J Jack Lee
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2017-03-08       Impact factor: 12.531

3.  Modifying the Clinical Research Infrastructure at a Dedicated Clinical Trials Unit: Assessment of Trial Development, Activation, and Participant Accrual.

Authors:  Chad Tang; Kenneth R Hess; Dwana Sanders; Suzanne E Davis; Aman U Buzdar; Razelle Kurzrock; J Jack Lee; Funda Meric-Bernstam; David S Hong
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2016-11-16       Impact factor: 12.531

Review 4.  Functional foods and their role in cancer prevention and health promotion: a comprehensive review.

Authors:  Mohammad Aghajanpour; Mohamad Reza Nazer; Zia Obeidavi; Mohsen Akbari; Parya Ezati; Nasroallah Moradi Kor
Journal:  Am J Cancer Res       Date:  2017-04-01       Impact factor: 6.166

5.  Current Activities of the Coalition of Cancer Cooperative Groups.

Authors:  Monica M Bertagnolli; Susan M Blaney; Charles D Blanke; Walter J Curran; Janet Dancey; Robert S Mannel; Peter J O'Dwyer; Mitchell D Schnall; Norman Wolmark
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2019-01-01       Impact factor: 13.506

6.  Expanding public-private collaborations to enhance cancer drug development: a report of the Institute of Medicine's workshop series, "Implementing a National Cancer Clinical Trials System for the 21st Century".

Authors:  Monica M Bertagnolli; Renzo Canetta; Sharyl J Nass
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2014-10-17

7.  Use of the National Cancer Institute Community Cancer Centers Program screening and accrual log to address cancer clinical trial accrual.

Authors:  Diane St Germain; Andrea M Denicoff; Eileen P Dimond; Angela Carrigan; Rebecca A Enos; Maria M Gonzalez; Kathy Wilkinson; Michelle A Mathiason; Brenda Duggan; Shaun Einolf; Worta McCaskill-Stevens; Donna M Bryant; Michael A Thompson; Stephen S Grubbs; Ronald S Go
Journal:  J Oncol Pract       Date:  2014-01-14       Impact factor: 3.840

8.  The National Cancer Institute-American Society of Clinical Oncology Cancer Trial Accrual Symposium: summary and recommendations.

Authors:  Andrea M Denicoff; Worta McCaskill-Stevens; Stephen S Grubbs; Suanna S Bruinooge; Robert L Comis; Peggy Devine; David M Dilts; Michelle E Duff; Jean G Ford; Steven Joffe; Lidia Schapira; Kevin P Weinfurt; Margo Michaels; Derek Raghavan; Ellen S Richmond; Robin Zon; Terrance L Albrecht; Michael A Bookman; Afshin Dowlati; Rebecca A Enos; Mona N Fouad; Marjorie Good; William J Hicks; Patrick J Loehrer; Alan P Lyss; Steven N Wolff; Debra M Wujcik; Neal J Meropol
Journal:  J Oncol Pract       Date:  2013-10-15       Impact factor: 3.840

9.  Phase II Pilot Study of Vemurafenib in Patients With Metastatic BRAF-Mutated Colorectal Cancer.

Authors:  Scott Kopetz; Jayesh Desai; Emily Chan; Joel Randolph Hecht; Peter J O'Dwyer; Dipen Maru; Van Morris; Filip Janku; Arvind Dasari; Woonbook Chung; Jean-Pierre J Issa; Peter Gibbs; Brian James; Garth Powis; Keith B Nolop; Suman Bhattacharya; Leonard Saltz
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2015-10-12       Impact factor: 44.544

10.  The importance of greater speed in drug development for advanced malignancies.

Authors:  David J Stewart; Andrew A Stewart; Paul Wheatley-Price; Gerald Batist; Hagop M Kantarjian; Joan Schiller; Mark Clemons; John-Peter Bradford; Laurel Gillespie; Razelle Kurzrock
Journal:  Cancer Med       Date:  2018-03-30       Impact factor: 4.452

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.