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.
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.
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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