Streamlining cardiovascular clinical trials to improve efficiency and generalisability

Controlled trials provide the most valid determination of the efficacy and safety of an intervention, but large cardiovascular clinical trials have become extremely costly and complex, making it difficult to study many important clinical questions. A critical question, and the main objective of this review, is how trials might be simplified while maintaining randomisation to preserve scientific integrity and unbiased efficacy assessments. Experience with alternative approaches is accumulating, specifically with registry-based randomised controlled trials that make use of data already collected. This approach addresses bias concerns while still capitalising on the benefits and efficiencies of a registry. Several completed or ongoing trials illustrate the feasibility of using registry-based controlled trials to answer important questions relevant to daily clinical practice. Randomised trials within healthcare organisation databases may also represent streamlined solutions for some types of investigations, although data quality (endpoint assessment) is likely to be a greater concern in those settings. These approaches are not without challenges, and issues pertaining to informed consent, blinding, data quality and regulatory standards remain to be fully explored. Collaboration among stakeholders is necessary to achieve standards for data management and analysis, to validate large data sources for use in randomised trials, and to re-evaluate ethical standards to encourage research while also ensuring that patients are protected. The rapidly evolving efforts to streamline cardiovascular clinical trials have the potential to lead to major advances in promoting better care and outcomes for patients with cardiovascular disease.

[1]  Rachael Williams,et al.  Study investigating the generalisability of a COPD trial based in primary care (Salford Lung Study) and the presence of a Hawthorne effect , 2018, BMJ Open Respiratory Research.

[2]  E. Perucca From clinical trials of antiepileptic drugs to treatment , 2018, Epilepsia open.

[3]  Adam Cohen,et al.  Improving public health by improving clinical trial guidelines and their application , 2017, European heart journal.

[4]  E. Antman,et al.  The Changing Landscape of Randomized Clinical Trials in Cardiovascular Disease. , 2016, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[5]  Catherine Harvey,et al.  Effectiveness of Fluticasone Furoate-Vilanterol for COPD in Clinical Practice. , 2016, The New England journal of medicine.

[6]  L. Wallentin,et al.  Bivalirudin versus heparin in non-ST and ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction-a registry-based randomized clinical trial in the SWEDEHEART registry (the VALIDATE-SWEDEHEART trial). , 2016, American heart journal.

[7]  M. Landray,et al.  Improving clinical trials for cardiovascular diseases: a position paper from the Cardiovascular Round Table of the European Society of Cardiology. , 2016, European heart journal.

[8]  Sean M. O'Brien,et al.  ACC/AHA/STS Statement on the Future of Registries and the Performance Measurement Enterprise: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Performance Measures and The Society of Thoracic Surgeons , 2015, Circulation. Cardiovascular quality and outcomes.

[9]  Russell L. Rothman,et al.  The ADAPTABLE Trial and PCORnet: Shining Light on a New Research Paradigm , 2015, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[10]  R. Califf,et al.  The future of cardiovascular clinical research in North America and beyond-addressing challenges and leveraging opportunities through unique academic and grassroots collaborations. , 2015, American heart journal.

[11]  Christopher B. Granger,et al.  Registry-based randomized clinical trials—a new clinical trial paradigm , 2015, Nature Reviews Cardiology.

[12]  Sunil V. Rao,et al.  Randomized trial of primary PCI with or without routine manual thrombectomy. , 2015, The New England journal of medicine.

[13]  C. Petrini Regulation (EU) No 536/2014 on clinical trials on medicinal products for human use: an overview. , 2014, Annali dell'Istituto superiore di sanita.

[14]  Chris Tachibana,et al.  A guide to research partnerships for pragmatic clinical trials , 2014, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[15]  M. Lauer Commentary on Vickers , 2014, Clinical trials.

[16]  Taghrid Obied,et al.  Oversight of clinical investigations- A risk based approach to monitoring , 2014 .

[17]  Katie Brittain,et al.  The effectiveness of collaborative care for people with memory problems in primary care: results of the CAREDEM case management modelling and feasibility study. , 2014, Health technology assessment.

[18]  Brian J. McCourt,et al.  A registry-based randomized trial comparing radial and femoral approaches in women undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: the SAFE-PCI for Women (Study of Access Site for Enhancement of PCI for Women) trial. , 2014, JACC. Cardiovascular interventions.

[19]  Joy Adamson,et al.  The opportunities and challenges of pragmatic point-of-care randomised trials using routinely collected electronic records: evaluations of two exemplar trials. , 2014, Health technology assessment.

[20]  T. Beauchamp,et al.  Informed consent for comparative effectiveness trials. , 2014, The New England journal of medicine.

[21]  Francis S. Collins,et al.  PCORnet: turning a dream into reality , 2014, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[22]  Richard Platt,et al.  Launching PCORnet, a national patient-centered clinical research network , 2014, Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA.

[23]  M. Lauer,et al.  The imperative of overcoming barriers to the conduct of large, simple trials. , 2014, JAMA.

[24]  Michael S Lauer,et al.  Eliminating the "expensive" adjective for clinical trials. , 2014, American heart journal.

[25]  A. Woodcock,et al.  Obtaining real-world evidence: the Salford Lung Study , 2014, Thorax.

[26]  L. Svensson,et al.  DETermination of the role of OXygen in suspected Acute Myocardial Infarction trial. , 2014, American heart journal.

[27]  J. McMurray,et al.  Large streamlined trials in cardiovascular disease. , 2014, European heart journal.

[28]  T. Beauchamp,et al.  Informed consent, comparative effectiveness, and learning health care. , 2014, The New England journal of medicine.

[29]  Rustam Al-Shahi Salman,et al.  Increasing value and reducing waste in biomedical research regulation and management , 2014, The Lancet.

[30]  R. Califf,et al.  Embedding cardiovascular research into practice. , 2013, JAMA.

[31]  David Erlinge,et al.  Thrombus aspiration during ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. , 2013, The New England journal of medicine.

[32]  Ralph B D'Agostino,et al.  The randomized registry trial--the next disruptive technology in clinical research? , 2013, The New England journal of medicine.

[33]  Mitchell W Krucoff,et al.  Embedding a randomized clinical trial into an ongoing registry infrastructure: unique opportunities for efficiency in design of the Study of Access site For Enhancement of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Women (SAFE-PCI for Women). , 2013, American heart journal.

[34]  T. Puglisi Reform within the common rule? Commentary. , 2013, The Hastings Center report.

[35]  C. Grady,et al.  Making the transition to a learning health care system. Commentary. , 2013, The Hastings Center report.

[36]  R. Platt,et al.  Evaluation as part of operations: reconciling the common rule and continuous improvement. Commentary. , 2013, The Hastings Center report.

[37]  H. Krumholz,et al.  Ethical oversight: serving the best interests of patients. Commentary. , 2013, The Hastings Center report.

[38]  J. Menikoff The unbelievable rightness of being in clinical trials. Commentary. , 2013, The Hastings Center report.

[39]  S. Eckstein The Oxford Textbook of Clinical Research Ethics , 2012 .

[40]  R. Platt,et al.  Developing the Sentinel System--a national resource for evidence development. , 2011, The New England journal of medicine.

[41]  Deepak L. Bhatt,et al.  Advancing the care of cardiac patients using registry data: going where randomized clinical trials dare not. , 2010, JAMA.

[42]  Ezekiel J. Emanuel,et al.  The Oxford Textbook of Clinical Research Ethics , 2008 .

[43]  S J Pocock,et al.  Randomized trials or observational tribulations? , 2000, The New England journal of medicine.

[44]  Robert Kevin Grigsby,et al.  Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects , 1993, Research on social work practice.

[45]  L. Bolognese,et al.  RANDOMISED TRIAL OF INTRAVENOUS STREPTOKINASE, ORAL ASPIRIN, BOTH, OR NEITHER AMONG 17 187 CASES OF SUSPECTED ACUTE MYOCARDIAL INFARCTION: ISIS-2 , 1988, The Lancet.

[46]  Sarah Parish,et al.  Randomized trial of intravenous streptokinase, oral aspirin, both, or neither among 17,187 cases of suspected acute myocardial infarction: ISIS-2.ISIS-2 (Second International Study of Infarct Survival) Collaborative Group. , 1988, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[47]  Y. Ohtsuki,et al.  ISOLATION OF HTLV-I FROM CEREBROSPINAL FLUID OF A PATIENT WITH MYELOPATHY , 1986, The Lancet.

[48]  Gruppo Italiano per lo Studio della Soprawivenza nell'Inf Miocardico.,et al.  EFFECTIVENESS OF INTRAVENOUS THROMBOLYTIC TREATMENT IN ACUTE MYOCARDIAL INFARCTION , 1986, The Lancet.

[49]  J. Salerno Effectiveness of intravenous thrombolytic treatment in acute myocardial infarction. Gruppo Italiano per lo Studio della Streptochinasi nell'Infarto Miocardico (GISSI). , 1986, Lancet.

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