Georg Melzer1, Tim Maiwald2, Hans-Ulrich Prokosch1, Thomas Ganslandt1,3. 1. Chair of Medical Informatics, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany. 2. Institute for Electronics Engineering, Department Electrical Engineering, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany. 3. Heinrich-Lanz-Center for Digital Health, Department of Biomedical Informatics, Mannheim University Medicine, Ruprecht-Karls-University Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Even though clinical trials are indispensable for medical research, they are frequently impaired by delayed or incomplete patient recruitment, resulting in cost overruns or aborted studies. Study protocols based on real-world data with precisely expressed eligibility criteria and realistic cohort estimations are crucial for successful study execution. The increasing availability of routine clinical data in electronic health records (EHRs) provides the opportunity to also support patient recruitment during the prescreening phase. While solutions for electronic recruitment support have been published, to our knowledge, no method for the prioritization of eligibility criteria in this context has been explored. METHODS: In the context of the Electronic Health Records for Clinical Research (EHR4CR) project, we examined the eligibility criteria of the KATHERINE trial. Criteria were extracted from the study protocol, deduplicated, and decomposed. A paper chart review and data warehouse query were executed to retrieve clinical data for the resulting set of simplified criteria separately from both sources. Criteria were scored according to disease specificity, data availability, and discriminatory power based on their content and the clinical dataset. RESULTS: The study protocol contained 35 eligibility criteria, which after simplification yielded 70 atomic criteria. For a cohort of 106 patients with breast cancer and neoadjuvant treatment, 47.9% of data elements were captured through paper chart review, with the data warehouse query yielding 26.9% of data elements. Score application resulted in a prioritized subset of 17 criteria, which yielded a sensitivity of 1.00 and specificity 0.57 on EHR data (paper charts, 1.00 and 0.80) compared with actual recruitment in the trial. CONCLUSION: It is possible to prioritize clinical trial eligibility criteria based on real-world data to optimize prescreening of patients on a selected subset of relevant and available criteria and reduce implementation efforts for recruitment support. The performance could be further improved by increasing EHR data coverage. Thieme. All rights reserved.
BACKGROUND: Even though clinical trials are indispensable for medical research, they are frequently impaired by delayed or incomplete patient recruitment, resulting in cost overruns or aborted studies. Study protocols based on real-world data with precisely expressed eligibility criteria and realistic cohort estimations are crucial for successful study execution. The increasing availability of routine clinical data in electronic health records (EHRs) provides the opportunity to also support patient recruitment during the prescreening phase. While solutions for electronic recruitment support have been published, to our knowledge, no method for the prioritization of eligibility criteria in this context has been explored. METHODS: In the context of the Electronic Health Records for Clinical Research (EHR4CR) project, we examined the eligibility criteria of the KATHERINE trial. Criteria were extracted from the study protocol, deduplicated, and decomposed. A paper chart review and data warehouse query were executed to retrieve clinical data for the resulting set of simplified criteria separately from both sources. Criteria were scored according to disease specificity, data availability, and discriminatory power based on their content and the clinical dataset. RESULTS: The study protocol contained 35 eligibility criteria, which after simplification yielded 70 atomic criteria. For a cohort of 106 patients with breast cancer and neoadjuvant treatment, 47.9% of data elements were captured through paper chart review, with the data warehouse query yielding 26.9% of data elements. Score application resulted in a prioritized subset of 17 criteria, which yielded a sensitivity of 1.00 and specificity 0.57 on EHR data (paper charts, 1.00 and 0.80) compared with actual recruitment in the trial. CONCLUSION: It is possible to prioritize clinical trial eligibility criteria based on real-world data to optimize prescreening of patients on a selected subset of relevant and available criteria and reduce implementation efforts for recruitment support. The performance could be further improved by increasing EHR data coverage. Thieme. All rights reserved.
Authors: R J Prescott; C E Counsell; W J Gillespie; A M Grant; I T Russell; S Kiauka; I R Colthart; S Ross; S M Shepherd; D Russell Journal: Health Technol Assess Date: 1999 Impact factor: 4.014
Authors: Justin Doods; Caroline Lafitte; Nadine Ulliac-Sagnes; Johan Proeve; Florence Botteri; Robert Walls; Andy Sykes; Martin Dugas; Fleur Fritz Journal: Stud Health Technol Inform Date: 2015
Authors: Hansi Zhang; Zhe He; Xing He; Yi Guo; David R Nelson; François Modave; Yonghui Wu; William Hogan; Mattia Prosperi; Jiang Bian Journal: AMIA Annu Symp Proc Date: 2018-12-05
Authors: Shawn N Murphy; Griffin Weber; Michael Mendis; Vivian Gainer; Henry C Chueh; Susanne Churchill; Isaac Kohane Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2010 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: B Trinczek; F Köpcke; T Leusch; R W Majeed; B Schreiweis; J Wenk; B Bergh; C Ohmann; R Röhrig; H U Prokosch; M Dugas Journal: Appl Clin Inform Date: 2014-03-19 Impact factor: 2.342
Authors: Felix Köpcke; Stefan Kraus; Axel Scholler; Carla Nau; Jürgen Schüttler; Hans-Ulrich Prokosch; Thomas Ganslandt Journal: Int J Med Inform Date: 2012-12-21 Impact factor: 4.046
Authors: Philipp Bruland; Christian Forster; Bernhard Breil; Sonja Ständer; Martin Dugas; Fleur Fritz Journal: Int J Med Inform Date: 2014-08-29 Impact factor: 4.046
Authors: Maurice Henkel; Tobias Horn; Francois Leboutte; Pawel Trotsenko; Sarah Gina Dugas; Sarah Ursula Sutter; Georg Ficht; Christian Engesser; Marc Matthias; Aurelien Stalder; Jan Ebbing; Philip Cornford; Helge Seifert; Bram Stieltjes; Christian Wetterauer Journal: PLoS One Date: 2022-07-20 Impact factor: 3.752
Authors: Chin Yee Shim; Si Yee Chan; Yuan Wei; Hazim Ghani; Liyana Ahmad; Hanisah Sharif; Mohammad Fathi Alikhan; Saifuddien Haji Bagol; Surita Taib; Chee Wah Tan; Xin Mei Ong; Lin-Fa Wang; Yan Wang; An Qi Liu; Hong Shen Lim; Justin Wong; Lin Naing; Anne Catherine Cunningham Journal: Front Public Health Date: 2022-09-12