Data monitoring committees for pragmatic clinical trials

In any clinical trial, it is essential to monitor the accumulating data to be sure that the trial continues to be safe for participants and that the trial is being conducted properly. Data monitoring committees, independent expert panels who undertake regular reviews of the data as the trial progresses, serve an important role in safeguarding the interests of research participants and ensuring trial integrity in many trials. Many pragmatic clinical trials, which aim to inform healthcare decisions by comparing alternate interventions in heterogeneous healthcare delivery settings, will warrant review by an independent data monitoring committee due to their potential impact on clinical practice. However, the very features that make a trial “pragmatic” may pose challenges in terms of which aspects of a trial to monitor and when it is appropriate for a data monitoring committee to intervene. Using the Pragmatic-Explanatory Continuum Indicator Summary tool that draws distinctions between pragmatic and explanatory clinical trials, we review characteristics of pragmatic clinical trials that may have implications for data monitoring committees and interim monitoring plans. These include broad eligibility criteria, a focus on subjective patient-centered outcomes, and in some cases a lack of standardized follow-up procedures across study sites. Additionally, protocol adherence is often purposefully not addressed in pragmatic trials in order to accurately represent the clinical practice setting and maintain practicability of implementation; there are differing viewpoints as to whether adherence should be assessed and acted upon by data monitoring committees in these trials. Some other issues not specifically related to the Pragmatic-Explanatory Continuum Indicator Summary criteria may also merit special consideration in pragmatic trials. Thresholds for early termination of a pragmatic clinical trial might be controversial. The distinguishing features of pragmatic clinical trials require careful consideration when developing interim data monitoring plans, and trial sponsors, investigators, and data monitoring committees should agree on a plan before trial inception. Finally, special expertise, such as an informatics, may be helpful on data monitoring committees for some pragmatic clinical trials. Patient representatives may provide particularly valuable insights in the monitoring process.

[1]  David Hunt,et al.  ISIS-3 - A RANDOMIZED COMPARISON OF STREPTOKINASE VS TISSUE PLASMINOGEN-ACTIVATOR VS ANISTREPLASE AND OF ASPIRIN PLUS HEPARIN VS ASPIRIN ALONE AMONG 41,299 CASES OF SUSPECTED ACUTE MYOCARDIAL-INFARCTION , 1992 .

[2]  J. Grimshaw,et al.  Intracluster correlation coefficients in cluster randomized trials: empirical insights into how should they be reported , 2004, BMC medical research methodology.

[3]  S. Nissen Commentary: Confidentiality of interim trial data—The emerging crisis , 2015, Clinical trials.

[4]  E. Veys,et al.  HL-A AND INFECTIVE SACROILEITIS , 1974 .

[5]  T. Fleming Protecting the confidentiality of interim data: Addressing current challenges , 2015, Clinical trials.

[6]  Raymond C. Schneider,et al.  ISIS-4: A randomised factorial trial assessing early oral captopril, oral mononitrate, and intravenous magnesium sulphate in 58 050 patients with suspected acute myocardial infarction , 1995, The Lancet.

[7]  Dmitry Khodyakov,et al.  Ethical community-engaged research: a literature review. , 2013, American journal of public health.

[8]  A. Donner,et al.  Pitfalls of and controversies in cluster randomization trials. , 2004, American journal of public health.

[9]  D. Stryer,et al.  Practical clinical trials: increasing the value of clinical research for decision making in clinical and health policy. , 2003, JAMA.

[10]  J. Lellouch,et al.  Explanatory and pragmatic attitudes in therapeutical trials. , 1967, Journal of chronic diseases.

[11]  James I. Charlton Nothing About Us Without Us: Disability Oppression and Empowerment , 1998 .

[12]  Belinda Bateman,et al.  ‘Nothing about us without us’: considerations for research involving young people , 2011, Archives of Disease in Childhood: Education & Practice Edition.

[13]  E. J. Brown,et al.  The effect of digoxin on mortality and morbidity in patients with heart failure. , 1997, The New England journal of medicine.

[14]  Jun Zhu,et al.  Effect of glucose-insulin-potassium infusion on mortality in patients with acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: the CREATE-ECLA randomized controlled trial. , 2005, JAMA.

[15]  M. Kahn,et al.  Data Quality Assessment for Comparative Effectiveness Research in Distributed Data Networks , 2013, Medical care.

[16]  S. Quinn,et al.  The role of community advisory boards: involving communities in the informed consent process. , 2001, American journal of public health.

[17]  J. Sebus,et al.  THE SIMIAN CREASE. , 1964, Lancet.

[18]  Sharon F. Terry,et al.  Science and society: Advocacy groups as research organizations: the PXE International example , 2007, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[19]  Ole Fröbert,et al.  Thrombus Aspiration in ST-Elevation myocardial infarction in Scandinavia (TASTE trial). A multicenter, prospective, randomized, controlled clinical registry trial based on the Swedish angiography and angioplasty registry (SCAAR) platform. Study design and rationale. , 2010, American heart journal.

[20]  A. Rehman Data and Safety Monitoring Committees in Clinical Trials , 2010 .

[21]  R Peto,et al.  Trials: the next 50 years , 1998, BMJ.

[22]  K. Weinfurt,et al.  Participants’ perspectives on safety monitoring in clinical trials , 2013, Clinical trials.

[23]  Barbara J. Godlew,et al.  Transparency as a Means to Increase Clinical Trial Enrollment , 2010 .

[24]  D. DeMets,et al.  Enhancing Trial Integrity by Protecting the Independence of Data Monitoring Committees in Clinical Trials , 2014, Journal of biopharmaceutical statistics.

[25]  Ian Harvey,et al.  A pragmatic-explanatory continuum indicator summary (PRECIS): a tool to help trial designers. , 2009, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[26]  David L. DeMets,et al.  Data Monitoring Committees in Clinical Trials , 2002 .

[27]  J. H. van der Lee,et al.  Standard 3: Data Monitoring Committees , 2012, Pediatrics.

[28]  Allan Donner,et al.  Design and Analysis of Cluster Randomization Trials in Health Research , 2001 .

[29]  Curt D. Furberg,et al.  Data Monitoring in Clinical Trials: A Case Studies Approach , 2005 .

[30]  M. Pencina,et al.  Independent data monitoring committees: preparing a path for the future. , 2014, American Heart Journal.

[31]  Sharon F. Terry,et al.  How disease advocacy organizations participate in clinical research: a survey of genetic organizations , 2011, Genetics in Medicine.

[32]  W. Robiner Enhancing adherence in clinical research. , 2005, Contemporary clinical trials.

[33]  T. Abma,et al.  Patient issues in health research and quality of care: an inventory and data synthesis , 2013, Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy.

[34]  R. Simon,et al.  Role of independent data-monitoring committees in randomized clinical trials sponsored by the National Cancer Institute. , 1997, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[35]  Patricia M. Grambsch,et al.  Data Monitoring Committees in Clinical Trials: A Practical Perspective. , 2003 .

[36]  Albert W Wu,et al.  The Use of Patient-reported Outcomes (PRO) Within Comparative Effectiveness Research: Implications for Clinical Practice and Health Care Policy , 2012, Medical care.

[37]  Marsha A Raebel,et al.  Design considerations, architecture, and use of the Mini‐Sentinel distributed data system , 2012, Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety.

[38]  Jason Corburn,et al.  The power and the promise: working with communities to analyze data, interpret findings, and get to outcomes. , 2008, American journal of public health.

[39]  Jeremy Sugarman,et al.  Exploring the ethical and regulatory issues in pragmatic clinical trials , 2015, Clinical trials.