Literature DB >> 29714620

New Benchmarks Characterizing Growth in Protocol Design Complexity.

Kenneth A Getz1, Rafael A Campo2.   

Abstract

The Tufts Center for the Study of Drug Development and Medidata Solutions Inc analyzed data from 9737 protocols and 130,601 investigative site contracts associated with these protocols to derive updated benchmarks characterizing protocol complexity. The results of the study indicate that protocol design complexity continues to grow rapidly. Nearly all phase I, II, and III complexity measures associated with protocol execution increased significantly (eg, P < .0001) from 2001-2005 to 2011-2015. These measures include the number of unique and total procedures performed per patient over the course of a study, the site work effort to administer protocol procedures, the number of study volunteer visits, and the total number of procedures performed per study volunteer visit. The total cost per planned study volunteer per visit also increased significantly (eg, P < .0001) as did the total cost per study volunteer across all planned study visits. Phase I protocols remain the most complex and the most demanding to execute. Phase III protocols have seen the most substantial growth in protocol complexity. Phase IV protocols saw only modest increases in executional complexity during the 10-year time horizon. The implications of the study findings are discussed.

Entities:  

Keywords:  clinical research protocols; clinical study design; clinical trial cost; clinical trial cycle time; clinical trial design; protocol complexity; protocol design

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29714620     DOI: 10.1177/2168479017713039

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ther Innov Regul Sci        ISSN: 2168-4790            Impact factor:   1.778


  10 in total

Review 1.  Design and conduct of confirmatory chronic pain clinical trials.

Authors:  Nathaniel Katz
Journal:  Pain Rep       Date:  2020-12-18

2.  Evaluating Site-Level Implementations of the HL7 FHIR Standard to Support eSource Data Exchange in Clinical Research.

Authors:  Maryam Y Garza; Michael W Rutherford; Bhargav Adagarla; Eric Eisenstein; Karan R Kumar; Kanecia O Zimmerman; Umit Topaloglu; Meredith Zozus
Journal:  Stud Health Technol Inform       Date:  2021-05-27

3.  Design and rationale of a multi-center, pragmatic, open-label randomized trial of antimicrobial therapy - the study of clinical efficacy of antimicrobial therapy strategy using pragmatic design in Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis (CleanUP-IPF) clinical trial.

Authors:  Kevin J Anstrom; Imre Noth; Kevin R Flaherty; Rex H Edwards; Joan Albright; Amanda Baucom; Maria Brooks; Allan B Clark; Emily S Clausen; Michael T Durheim; Dong-Yun Kim; Jerry Kirchner; Justin M Oldham; Laurie D Snyder; Andrew M Wilson; Stephen R Wisniewski; Eric Yow; Fernando J Martinez
Journal:  Respir Res       Date:  2020-03-12

4.  Streamlining the institutional review board process in pragmatic randomized clinical trials: challenges and lessons learned from the Aspirin Dosing: A Patient-centric Trial Assessing Benefits and Long-Term Effectiveness (ADAPTABLE) trial.

Authors:  Guillaume Marquis-Gravel; Holly Robertson; W Schuyler Jones; Danielle Riley; Daniel E Ford; David Crenshaw; Yvonne A Joosten; Lindsey Rudov; Adrian F Hernandez; Rachel Hess
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2021-01-25       Impact factor: 2.279

5.  Impact of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic on Global Lung Cancer Clinical Trials: Why It Matters to People With Lung Cancer.

Authors:  Upal Basu Roy; Anne-Marie Baird; Andrew Ciupek; Jesme Fox; Eugene Manley; Kim Norris Xx; Giorgio V Scagliotti; Heather A Wakelee; Tetsuya Mitsudomi; Russell C Clark; Renee Arndt; Fred R Hirsch; Paul A Bunn; Matthew P Smeltzer
Journal:  JTO Clin Res Rep       Date:  2021-12-23

Review 6.  Artificial intelligence in clinical and translational science: Successes, challenges and opportunities.

Authors:  Elmer V Bernstam; Paula K Shireman; Funda Meric-Bernstam; Meredith N Zozus; Xiaoqian Jiang; Bradley B Brimhall; Ashley K Windham; Susanne Schmidt; Shyam Visweswaran; Ye Ye; Heath Goodrum; Yaobin Ling; Seemran Barapatre; Michael J Becich
Journal:  Clin Transl Sci       Date:  2021-10-30       Impact factor: 4.689

7.  Protocol Design and Performance Benchmarks by Phase and by Oncology and Rare Disease Subgroups.

Authors:  Kenneth Getz; Zachary Smith; Marcy Kravet
Journal:  Ther Innov Regul Sci       Date:  2022-08-12       Impact factor: 1.337

8.  Measuring and controlling medical record abstraction (MRA) error rates in an observational study.

Authors:  Maryam Y Garza; Tremaine Williams; Sahiti Myneni; Susan H Fenton; Songthip Ounpraseuth; Zhuopei Hu; Jeannette Lee; Jessica Snowden; Meredith N Zozus; Anita C Walden; Alan E Simon; Barbara McClaskey; Sarah G Sanders; Sandra S Beauman; Sara R Ford; Lacy Malloch; Amy Wilson; Lori A Devlin; Leslie W Young
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2022-08-15       Impact factor: 4.612

Review 9.  Modernizing Clinical Trial Eligibility Criteria: Recommendations of the ASCO-Friends of Cancer Research Laboratory Reference Ranges and Testing Intervals Work Group.

Authors:  Alexander I Spira; Mark D Stewart; Suzanne Jones; Elaine Chang; Anitra Fielding; Nicole Richie; Laura S Wood; Michael A Thompson; Lee Jones; Abhilasha Nair; Brandon A Mahal; David E Gerber
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2021-02-09       Impact factor: 13.801

10.  Using systematic data categorisation to quantify the types of data collected in clinical trials: the DataCat project.

Authors:  Evelyn Crowley; Shaun Treweek; Katie Banister; Suzanne Breeman; Lynda Constable; Seonaidh Cotton; Anne Duncan; Adel El Feky; Heidi Gardner; Kirsteen Goodman; Doris Lanz; Alison McDonald; Emma Ogburn; Kath Starr; Natasha Stevens; Marie Valente; Gordon Fernie
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2020-06-16       Impact factor: 2.279

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.