Reviewing Clinical Trials

The idea for this manual came from Pfizer in the US, which provided the Clinical Trials Centre at The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, PR China with a nonbinding grant for its development. The general project layout protocol was accepted by Pfizer in July 2009. Pfizer has not in any way interfered with the project, except for providing nonbinding comments to the final product. The entire text of this manual was written by Johan PE Karlberg. Marjorie A Speers provided considerable and essential comments on the contents and the first and subsequent drafts. A group of international human research protection experts mostly working in non-profit institutions or organisations - see Contributors for details - reviewed and provided important comments on the contents and final draft. It was solely created with the intention to promote human research protection of participants in clinical trials. This manual will be translated into numerous languages and is provided free of charge as an electronic file over the Internet (http://www.ClinicalTrialMagnifier.com) and offered in print for a fee. The objective beyond this project is to establish educational activities, developed around the manual, and jointly organised with leading academic institutions worldwide.

Data sharing can accelerate new discoveries by avoiding duplicative trials, stimulating new ideas for research, and enabling the maximal scientific knowledge and benefits to be gained from the efforts of clinical trial participants and investigators. At the same time, sharing clinical trial data presents risks, burdens, and challenges. These include the need to protect the privacy and honor the consent of clinical trial participants; safeguard the legitimate economic interests of sponsors; and guard against invalid secondary analyses, which could undermine trust in clinical trials or otherwise harm public health. Sharing Clinical Trial Data presents activities and strategies for the responsible sharing of clinical trial data. With the goal of increasing scientific knowledge to lead to better therapies for patients, this book identifies guiding principles and makes recommendations to maximize the benefits and minimize risks. This report offers guidance on the types of clinical trial data available at different points in the process, the points in the process at which each type of data should be shared, methods for sharing data, what groups should have access to data, and future knowledge and infrastructure needs. Responsible sharing of clinical trial data will allow other investigators to replicate published findings and carry out additional analyses, strengthen the evidence base for regulatory and clinical decisions, and increase the scientific knowledge gained from investments by the funders of clinical trials. The recommendations of Sharing Clinical Trial Data will be useful both now and well into the future as improved sharing of data leads to a stronger evidence base for treatment. This book will be of interest to stakeholders across the spectrum of research--from funders, to researchers, to journals, to physicians, and ultimately, to patients.

Clinical trials are used to elucidate the most appropriate preventive, diagnostic, or treatment options for individuals with a given medical condition. Perhaps the most essential feature of a clinical trial is that it aims to use results based on a limited sample of research participants to see if the intervention is safe and effective or if it is comparable to a comparison treatment. Sample size is a crucial component of any clinical trial. A trial with a small number of research participants is more prone to variability and carries a considerable risk of failing to demonstrate the effectiveness of a given intervention when one really is present. This may occur in phase I (safety and pharmacologic profiles), II (pilot efficacy evaluation), and III (extensive assessment of safety and efficacy) trials. Although phase I and II studies may have smaller sample sizes, they usually have adequate statistical power, which is the committee's definition of a "large" trial. Sometimes a trial with eight participants may have adequate statistical power, statistical power being the probability of rejecting the null hypothesis when the hypothesis is false. Small Clinical Trials assesses the current methodologies and the appropriate situations for the conduct of clinical trials with small sample sizes. This report assesses the published literature on various strategies such as (1) meta-analysis to combine disparate information from several studies including Bayesian techniques as in the confidence profile method and (2) other alternatives such as assessing therapeutic results in a single treated population (e.g., astronauts) by sequentially measuring whether the intervention is falling above or below a preestablished probability outcome range and meeting predesigned specifications as opposed to incremental improvement.

An ideal health care system relies on efficiently generating timely, accurate evidence to deliver on its promise of diminishing the divide between clinical practice and research. There are growing indications, however, that the current health care system and the clinical research that guides medical decisions in the United States falls far short of this vision. The process of generating medical evidence through clinical trials in the United States is expensive and lengthy, includes a number of regulatory hurdles, and is based on a limited infrastructure. The link between clinical research and medical progress is also frequently misunderstood or unsupported by both patients and providers. The focus of clinical research changes as diseases emerge and new treatments create cures for old conditions. As diseases evolve, the ultimate goal remains to speed new and improved medical treatments to patients throughout the world. To keep pace with rapidly changing health care demands, clinical research resources need to be organized and on hand to address the numerous health care questions that continually emerge. Improving the overall capacity of the clinical research enterprise will depend on ensuring that there is an adequate infrastructure in place to support the investigators who conduct research, the patients with real diseases who volunteer to participate in experimental research, and the institutions that organize and carry out the trials. To address these issues and better understand the current state of clinical research in the United States, the Institute of Medicine's (IOM) Forum on Drug Discovery, Development, and Translation held a 2-day workshop entitled Transforming Clinical Research in the United States. The workshop, summarized in this volume, laid the foundation for a broader initiative of the Forum addressing different aspects of clinical research. Future Forum plans include further examining regulatory, administrative, and structural barriers to the effective conduct of clinical research; developing a vision for a stable, continuously funded clinical research infrastructure in the United States; and considering strategies and collaborative activities to facilitate more robust public engagement in the clinical research enterprise.

This classic reference, now updated with the newest applications and results, addresses the fundamentals of such trials based on sound scientific methodology, statistical principles, and years of accumulated experience by the three authors.

In an effort to increase knowledge and understanding of the process of assuring data quality and validity in clinical trials, the IOM hosted a workshop to open a dialogue on the process to identify and discuss issues of mutual concern among industry, regulators, payers, and consumers. The presenters and panelists together developed strategies that could be used to address the issues that were identified. This IOM report of the workshop summarizes the present status and highlights possible strategies for making improvements to the education of interested and affected parties as well as facilitating future planning.

Successful drug development relies on accurate and efficient clinical trials to deliver the best and most effective pharmaceuticals and clinical care to patients. However, the current model for clinical trials is outdated, inefficient and costly. Clinical trials are limited by small sample sizes that do not reflect variations among patients in the real world, financial burdens on participants, and slow processes, and these factors contribute to the disconnect between clinical research and clinical practice. On November 28-29, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine convened a workshop to investigate the current clinical trials system and explore the potential benefits and challenges of implementing virtual clinical trials as an enhanced alternative for the future. This publication summarizes the presentations and discussions from the workshop.

In 1948 the first randomized controlled trial was published by the English Medical Research Council in the British Medical Journal. Until then, observations had been uncontrolled. Initially, trials frequently did not confirm the hypotheses to be tested. This phenomenon was attributed to low sensitivity due to small samples, as well as inappropriate hypotheses based on biased prior trials. Additional flaws were recognized and, subsequently, were better accounted for: carryover effects due to insufficient washout from previous treatments, time effects due to external factors and the natural history of the condition under study, bias due to asymmetry between treatment groups, lack of sensitivity due to a negative correlation between treatment responses, and so on. Such flaws, mainly of a technical nature, have been largely corrected and led to trials after 1970 being of significantly higher quality. The past decade has focused, in addition to technical aspects, on the need for circumspection in the planning and conducting of clinical trials. As a consequence, prior to approval, clinical trial protocols are now routinely scrutinized by different circumstantial organs, including ethics committees, institutional and federal review boards, national and international scientific organizations, and monitoring committees charged with conducting interim analyses. This book not only explains classical statistical analyses of clinical trials, but also addresses relatively novel issues, including equivalence testing, interim analyses, sequential analyses, and meta-analyses, and provides a framework of the best statistical methods currently available for such purposes. This book is not only useful for investigators involved in the field of clinical trials, but also for all physicians who wish to better understand the data of trials as currently published.