Addressing the challenges to successful recruitment and retention in Alzheimer's disease clinical trials.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Grill JD
PROVIDER: S-EPMC3031880 | biostudies-literature | 2010 Dec
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Addressing the challenges to successful recruitment and retention in Alzheimer's disease clinical trials.
Grill Joshua D JD Karlawish Jason J
Alzheimer's research & therapy 20101221 6
Among the key challenges in Alzheimer's disease drug development is the timely completion of clinical trials. Unfortunately, clinical trials often suffer from slow or insufficient enrollment. Successful clinical trial recruitment describes a balance between expeditiously achieving full enrollment and ensuring an appropriate study sample. Investigators face a number of challenges to the successful negotiation of this balance. The failure to address these challenges means that drug development may ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Clinical trials for Alzheimer's disease (AD) are slower to enroll study participants, take longer to complete, and are more expensive than trials in most other therapeutic areas. The recruitment and retention of a large number of qualified, diverse volunteers to participate in clinical research studies remain among the key barriers to the successful completion of AD clinical trials. An advisory panel of experts from academia, patient-advocacy organizations, philanthropy, non-profit, government, and industry convened in 2020 to assess the critical challenges facing recruitment in Alzheimer's clinical trials and develop a set of recommendations to overcome them. This paper briefly reviews existing challenges in AD clinical research and discusses the feasibility and implications of the panel's recommendations for actionable and inclusive solutions to accelerate the development of novel therapies for AD.
| S-EPMC9911558 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Most Alzheimer's disease (AD) clinical trials enroll participants multinationally. Yet, few data exist to guide investigators and sponsors regarding the types of patients enrolled in these studies and whether participant characteristics vary by region.We used data derived from four multinational phase III trials in mild to moderate AD to examine whether regional differences exist with regard to participant demographics, safety reporting, and baseline scores on the Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE), the 11-item Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive subscale (ADAS-cog11), the Clinical Dementia Rating scale Sum of Boxes (CDR-SB), the Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study-Activities of Daily Living Inventory (ADCS-ADL), and the Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI). We assigned 31 participating nations to 7 geographic regions: North America, South America/Mexico, Western Europe/Israel, Eastern Europe/Russia, Australia/South Africa, Asia, and Japan.North America, Western Europe/Israel, and Australia/South Africa enrolled similar proportions of men, apolipoprotein E ?4 carriers, and participants with spouse study partners, whereas Asia, Eastern Europe/Russia, and South America/Mexico had lower proportions for these variables. North America and South America/Mexico enrolled older subjects, whereas Asia and South America/Mexico enrolled less-educated participants than the remaining regions. Approved AD therapy use differed among regions (range: 73% to 92%) and was highest in North America, Western Europe/Israel, and Japan. Dual therapy was most frequent in North America (48%). On the MMSE, North America, Western Europe/Israel, Japan, and Australia/South Africa had higher (better) scores, and Asia, South America/Mexico, and Eastern Europe/Russia had lower scores. Eastern Europe/Russia had more impaired ADAS-cog11 scores than all other regions. Eastern Europe/Russia and South America/Mexico had more impaired scores for the ADCS-ADL and the CDR-SB. Mean scores for the CDR-SB in Asia were milder than all regions except Japan. NPI scores were lower in Asia and Japan than in all other regions. Participants in North America and Western Europe/Israel reported more adverse events than those in Eastern Europe/Russia and Japan.These findings suggest that trial populations differ across geographic regions on most baseline characteristics and that multinational enrollment is associated with sample heterogeneity. The data provide initial guidance with regard to the regional differences that contribute to this heterogeneity and are important to consider when planning global trials.
| S-EPMC4481112 | biostudies-literature
Project description:There are multiple available treatments to enhance stroke rehabilitation, although few interventions have confirmed significant clinical improvements on motor function in pivotal Randomized Clinical Trials. Development of large Randomized Clinical Trials is limited by several barriers and low enrollment rate is considered an important factor. Consequently, most of the evidence comes from small sample size studies, often leading to limited conclusions. According to the National Institute of Health (NIH), about 80% of clinical trials in the United States do not achieve their timelines, increasing research costs and postponing regulatory approval of new therapies. Given that the success of a Randomized Clinical Trial is dependent on enrolling an adequate number of subjects, effective strategies to enhance recruitment rates are highly desirable. In addition, given the resources and time limitations, it is important to understand which strategies are most cost-effective. In this manuscript, we summarize and discuss nine recruitment strategies used in an NIH R21 sponsored clinical trial, including medical records review and online advertising, among others. In addition, we developed an index to compare the time spent benefit of each approach and guide the allocation of the recruitment efforts. For this trial, online advertising and referral from health care professionals other than physicians were the strategies with greater time-benefit, leading to the largest number of stroke subjects enrolled.
| S-EPMC6639562 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundEarly study exit is detrimental to statistical power and increases the risk for bias in Alzheimer's disease clinical trials. Previous analyses in early phase academic trials demonstrated associations between rates of trial incompletion and participants' study partner type, with participants enrolling with non-spouse study partners being at greater risk.MethodsWe conducted secondary analyses of two multinational phase III trials of semagacestat, an oral gamma secretase inhibitor, for mild-to-moderate AD dementia. Cox's proportional hazards regression model was used to estimate the relationship between study partner type and the risk of early exit from the trial after adjustment for a priori identified potential confounding factors. Additionally, we used a random forest model to identify top predictors of dropout.ResultsAmong participants with spousal, adult child, and other study partners, respectively, 35%, 38%, and 36% dropped out or died prior to protocol-defined study completion, respectively. In unadjusted models, the risk of trial incompletion differed by study partner type (unadjusted p value?=?0.027 for test of differences by partner type), but in models adjusting for potential confounding factors, the differences were not statistically significant (p value?=?0.928). In exploratory modeling, participant age was identified as the primary characteristic to explain the relationship between study partner type and the risk of failing to complete the trial. Participant age was also the strongest predictor of trial incompletion in the random forest model.ConclusionsAfter adjustment for age, no differences in the risk of incompletion were observed when comparing participants with different study partner types in these trials. Differences between our findings and the findings of previous studies may be explained by differences in trial phase, size, geographic regions, or the composition of academic and non-academic sites.
| S-EPMC7791680 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposePalliative care is increasingly viewed as a necessary component of cancer care, especially for patients with advanced disease. Rigorous clinical trials are thus needed to build the palliative care evidence base, but clinical research-especially participant recruitment-is difficult. Major barriers include (1) patient factors, (2) "gatekeeping," and (3) ethical concerns. Here we discuss an approach to overcoming these barriers, using the Palliative Care Trial (PCT) as a case study.Patients and methodsThe PCT was a 2 × 2 × 2 factorial randomized controlled trial (RCT) of different service delivery models to improve pain control in the palliative setting. It used a recruitment protocol that fused evidence-based strategies with principles of "social marketing," an approach involving the systematic application of marketing techniques. Main components included (1) an inclusive triage algorithm, (2) information booklets targeting particular stakeholders, (3) a specialized recruitment nurse, and (4) standardization of wording across all study communications.ResultsFrom an eligible pool of 607 patients, the PCT enrolled 461 patients over 26 months. Twenty percent of patients referred to the palliative care service were enrolled (76% of those eligible after screening). Several common barriers were minimized; among those who declined participation, family disinterest was uncommon (5%), as was the perception of burden imposed (4%).ConclusionChallenges to clinical trial recruitment in palliative care are significant but not insurmountable. A carefully crafted recruitment and retention protocol can be effective. Our experience with designing and deploying a social-marketing-based protocol shows the benefits of such an approach.
| S-EPMC3825289 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Clinical research in the pregnant population allows for delivery of quality, evidence-based care in obstetrics. However, in recent years, the field of obstetrics has faced severe challenges in the recruitment of the pregnant population into clinical trials, a struggle also shared by several other medical disciplines. We candidly describe our failure to recruit a healthy population of overweight and obese pregnant women in their first trimester. We were then able to glean unsuccessful and successful recruitment approaches and improve our recruitment effort by autopsy of failed strategies and with guidance from a survey disseminated to improve our understanding of community feelings about participating in research while pregnant. These "lessons learned" taught us that active recruitment within this population is a necessity; that is, direct (face-to-face discussions at obstetric appointments) compared with indirect (flyers and general emails) modalities and that prenatal care provider support of the proposed research study is vital to a patient's willingness to participate. By implementation of "lessons learned," we describe how we successfully recruited a similar pregnant population 1 year later. The Clinical Trials related to our article are as follows: 1) Expecting Success: NCT01610752, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01610752; 2) MomEE: NCT01954342, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01954342; and 3) Participate While Pregnant Survey: NCT02699632, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02699632.
| S-EPMC5321786 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and purposeThe National Institutes of Health policy calls for the inclusion of under-represented groups, such as women and minorities, in clinical research. Poor minority recruitment and retention in stroke clinical trials remain a significant challenge limiting safety and efficacy in a general population. Previous research examines participant barriers to clinical trial involvement, but little is known about the investigator perspective. This study addresses this gap and examines researcher-reported barriers and best practices of minority involvement in stroke clinical trials.MethodsQuantitative and qualitative methods, including surveys, focus groups, and key informant interviews were used.ResultsIn a survey of 93 prominent stroke researchers, 43 (51.2%; 70% response rate) respondents reported proactively setting recruitment goals for minority inclusion, 29 respondents (36.3%) reported requiring cultural competency staff training, and 44 respondents (51.2%) reported using community consultation about trial design. Focus groups and key informant interviews highlighted structural and institutional challenges to recruitment of minorities, including mistrust of the research/medical enterprise, poor communication, and lack of understanding of clinical trials. Researcher-identified best practices included using standardized project management procedures and protocols (eg, realistic budgeting to support challenges in recruitment, such as travel/parking reimbursement for participants), research staff cultural competency and communication training, and developing and fostering community partnerships that guide the research process.ConclusionsThis study's formative evaluation contributes a new dimension to the literature as it highlights researcher-reported barriers and best practices for enhancing participation of minority populations into stroke clinical trials.
| S-EPMC5526461 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAlzheimer's disease (AD) is associated with considerable costs and has a significant impact on health and social care systems.ObjectiveThis study assessed whether baseline comorbidities present in 2,594 patients with AD participating in two semagacestat randomized placebo-controlled trials (RCTs) would significantly impact overall costs.MethodsResource utilization was captured using the Resource Utilization in Dementia Scale-Lite. Comorbidities and concomitant medications were tabulated via patient and caregiver reports. Only baseline data were analyzed. Direct and indirect costs per month were calculated per patient. The relationship between cost and explanatory variables was explored in a regression model.ResultsThe baseline monthly cost of care in this RCT population was £1,147 ± 2,483, with informal care costs accounting for 75% of costs. Gender, age, and functional status were significant predictors of costs (p ≤ 0.0001). The cost ratio was not impacted when the number of comorbidities was added to the model (cost ratio = 0.95; 95% CI 0.91-0.99) or when combined with the number of concomitant medications (cost ratio = 0.97; 95% CI 0.95-1.00). Inconsistent findings related to the impact of individual comorbidities on costs were noted in sensitivity analyses.ConclusionsThe number of comorbidities, alone or when combined with concomitant medications, did not impact baseline costs of care, perhaps because RCTs often enroll less severely ill and more medically stable patients. However, higher costs were consistently associated with greater functional impairment similar to non-RCT databases. Supplemental sources (e.g., claims databases) are likely needed to better estimate the effects of disease and treatment on costs of illness captured in RCTs for AD.
| S-EPMC4646926 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesTo identify studies that applied behavioural approaches to issues of recruitment and/or retention to trials; to describe these approaches; and to identify gaps for future research.DesignSystematic mapping review of research undertaken in clinical trials within peer-reviewed sources. Review participants were individuals involved in clinical trials, including trial staff, participants, potential participants and former participants.Data sourcesMEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, ERIC, PsycINFO, Web of Science and ASSIA from inception to 15 January 2020 with no date or language restrictions.Eligibility criteriaStudies within the context of clinical trials reporting the barriers/facilitators to recruitment and retention, or developing/evaluating solutions to said barriers/facilitators, using a behavioural approach.Results31 articles were included. Recruitment-focused studies (n=22, 71%) represented the majority. Studies tended to focus on participant behaviours (n=22, 71%). Underserved populations (n=11, 35%) were a notable subset of studies. Most studies (n=23, 74%) were exploratory but those that evaluated interventions (n=8, 26%) often did so within underserved populations (n=6). A majority of studies (n=30, 97%) did not specify their behaviours consistent with guidelines from behavioural scientists. The most used approaches were social cognitive theory (n=8, 26%), the theory of planned behaviour (n=6, 19%) and the theoretical domains framework (n=5, 16%).ConclusionsA range of behavioural approaches have been applied to recruitment and retention to trials. The multitude of recruitment research here is consistent with trials research generally and emphasises the need for research into retention. Authors report target behaviours minimally, which is not conducive to replication. Further research should build on lessons here, such as clearly specifying behaviours. Increased methodological rigour and transparency will lead to robust evidence bases and less research waste in poor recruitment and retention. Overall, trials informed by behavioural approaches promises to be efficient and more participant focused.
| S-EPMC8915327 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionAlzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD) disproportionately impact racial and ethnic minority and socioeconomically disadvantaged adults. Yet, these populations are significantly underrepresented in research.MethodsWe systematically reviewed the literature for published reports describing recruitment and retention of individuals from underrepresented backgrounds in ADRD research or underrepresented participants' perspectives regarding ADRD research participation. Relevant evidence was synthesized and evaluated for quality.ResultsWe identified 22 eligible studies. Seven studies focused on recruitment/retention approaches, all of which included multifaceted efforts and at least one community outreach component. There was considerable heterogeneity in approaches used, specific activities and strategies, outcome measurement, and conclusions regarding effectiveness. Despite limited use of prospective evaluation strategies, most authors reported improvements in diverse representation in ADRD cohorts. Studies evaluating participant views focused largely on predetermined explanations of participation including attitudes, barriers/facilitators, education, trust, and religiosity. Across all studies, the strength of evidence was low.DiscussionOverall, the quantity and quality of available evidence to inform best practices in recruitment, retention, and inclusion of underrepresented populations in ADRD research are low. Further efforts to systematically evaluate the success of existing and emergent approaches will require improved methodological standards and uniform measures for evaluating recruitment, participation, and inclusivity.
| S-EPMC6944728 | biostudies-literature