Dataset Information

Digital pathology in nephrology clinical trials, research, and pathology practice.

ABSTRACT: PURPOSE OF REVIEW:In this review, we will discuss (i) how the recent advancements in digital technology and computational engineering are currently applied to nephropathology in the setting of clinical research, trials, and practice; (ii) the benefits of the new digital environment; (iii) how recognizing its challenges provides opportunities for transformation; and (iv) nephropathology in the upcoming era of kidney precision and predictive medicine. RECENT FINDINGS:Recent studies highlighted how new standardized protocols facilitate the harmonization of digital pathology database infrastructure and morphologic, morphometric, and computer-aided quantitative analyses. Digital pathology enables robust protocols for clinical trials and research, with the potential to identify previously underused or unrecognized clinically useful parameters. The integration of digital pathology with molecular signatures is leading the way to establishing clinically relevant morpho-omic taxonomies of renal diseases. SUMMARY:The introduction of digital pathology in clinical research and trials, and the progressive implementation of the modern software ecosystem, opens opportunities for the development of new predictive diagnostic paradigms and computer-aided algorithms, transforming the practice of renal disease into a modern computational science.

SUBMITTER: Barisoni L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5955389 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Digital pathology in nephrology clinical trials, research, and pathology practice.

Barisoni Laura L Hodgin Jeffrey B JB

Current opinion in nephrology and hypertension 20171101 6

<h4>Purpose of review</h4>In this review, we will discuss (i) how the recent advancements in digital technology and computational engineering are currently applied to nephropathology in the setting of clinical research, trials, and practice; (ii) the benefits of the new digital environment; (iii) how recognizing its challenges provides opportunities for transformation; and (iv) nephropathology in the upcoming era of kidney precision and predictive medicine.<h4>Recent findings</h4>Recent studies ...[more]

PMID: 28858910

Similar Datasets

Project description:Rationale & objectiveThe etiology of kidney disease remains unknown in many individuals with chronic kidney disease (CKD). We created the Mayo Clinic Nephrology Genomics Clinic to improve our ability to integrate genomic and clinical data to identify the etiology of unexplained CKD.Study designRetrospective study.Setting & participantsAn essential component of our program is the Nephrology Genomics Board which consists of nephrologists, geneticists, pathologists, translational omics scientists, and trainees who interpret the patient's clinical and genetic data. Since September 2016, the Board has reviewed 163 cases (15 cystic, 100 glomerular, 6 congenital anomalies of kidney and urinary tract (CAKUT), 20 stones, 15 tubulointerstitial, and 13 other).Analytical approachTesting was performed with targeted panels, single gene analysis, or analysis of kidney-related genes from exome sequencing. Variant classification was obtained based on the 2015 American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics and the Association for Molecular Pathology guidelines.ResultsA definitive genetic diagnosis was achieved for 50 families (30.7%). The highest diagnostic yield was obtained in individuals with tubulointerstitial diseases (53.3%), followed by congenital anomalies of the kidney and urological tract (33.3%), glomerular (31%), cysts (26.7%), stones (25%), and others (15.4%). A further 20 (12.3%) patients had variants of interest, and variant segregation, and research activities (exome, genome, or transcriptome sequencing) are ongoing for 44 (40%) unresolved families.LimitationsPossible overestimation of diagnostic rate due to inclusion of individuals with variants with evidence of pathogenicity but classified as of uncertain significance by the clinical laboratory.ConclusionsIntegration of genomic and research testing and multidisciplinary evaluation in a nephrology cohort with CKD of unknown etiology or suspected monogenic disease provided a diagnosis in a third of families. These diagnoses had prognostic implications, and often changes in management were implemented.

Project description:BackgroundWell-designed trials are of paramount importance in improving the delivery of care to patients with kidney disease. However, it remains unknown whether contemporary clinical trials within nephrology are of sufficient quality and quantity to meet this need.Study designSystematic review.Setting & populationStudies registered with ClinicalTrials.gov.Selection criteria for studiesInterventional (ie, nonobservational) studies (both randomized and nonrandomized) registered between October 2007 and September 2010 were included for analysis. Studies were reviewed independently by physicians and classified by clinical specialty.PredictorNephrology versus cardiology versus other trials.OutcomesSelect clinical trial characteristics.ResultsOf 40,970 trials overall, 1,054 (2.6%) were classified as nephrology. Most nephrology trials were for treatment (75.4%) or prevention (15.7%), with very few diagnostic, screening, or health services research studies. Most nephrology trials were randomized (72.3%). Study designs included 24.9% with a single study group, 64.0% that included parallel groups, and 9.4% that were crossover trials. Nephrology trials, compared with 2,264 cardiology trials (5.5% overall), were more likely to be smaller (64.5% vs 48.0% enrolling≤100 patients), phases 1-2 (29.0% vs 19.7%), and unblinded (66.2% vs 53.3%; P<0.05 for all). Nephrology trials also were more likely than cardiology trials to include a drug intervention (72.4% vs 41.9%) and less likely to report having a data monitoring committee (40.3% vs 48.5%; P<0.05 for all). Finally, there were few trials funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH; 3.3%, nephrology; 4.2%, cardiology).LimitationsDoes not include all trials performed worldwide, and frequent categorization of funding source as university may underestimate NIH support.ConclusionsCritical differences remain between clinical trials in nephrology and other specialties. Improving care for patients with kidney disease will require a concerted effort to increase the scope, quality, and quantity of clinical trials within nephrology.

Project description:ObjectivesIn an effort to mitigate COVID-19 related challenges for clinical research, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued new guidance for the conduct of 'virtual' clinical trials in late March 2020. This study documents trends in the use of connected digital products (CDPs), tools that enable remote patient monitoring and telehealth consultation, in clinical trials both before and after the onset of the pandemic.DesignWe applied a comprehensive text search algorithm to clinical trial registry data to identify trials that use CDPs for remote monitoring or telehealth. We compared CDP use in the months before and after the issuance of FDA guidance facilitating virtual clinical trials.SettingAll trials registered on ClinicalTrials.gov with start dates from May 2019 through February 2021.Outcome measuresThe primary outcome measure was the overall percentage of CDP use in clinical trials started in the 10 months prior to the pandemic onset (May 2019-February 2020) compared with the 10 months following (May 2020-February 2021). Secondary outcome measures included CDP usage by trial type (interventional, observational), funder type (industry, non-industry) and diagnoses (COVID-19 or non-COVID-19 participants).ResultsCDP usage in clinical trials increased by only 1.65 percentage points, from 14.19% (n=23 473) of all trials initiated in the 10 months prior to the pandemic onset to 15.84% (n=26 009) of those started in the 10 months following (p<0.01). The increase occurred primarily in observational studies and non-industry funded trials and was driven entirely by CDP usage in trials for COVID-19.ConclusionsThese findings suggest that in the short-term, new options created by regulatory guidance to stimulate telehealth and remote monitoring were not widely incorporated into clinical research. In the months immediately following the pandemic onset, CDP adoption increased primarily in observational and non-industry funded studies where virtual protocols are likely medically necessary due to the participants' COVID-19 diagnosis.

Dataset Information

Digital pathology in nephrology clinical trials, research, and pathology practice.

Publications

Digital pathology in nephrology clinical trials, research, and pathology practice.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets