Dataset Information

Contemporary use of real-world data for clinical trial conduct in the United States: a scoping review.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

Real-world data (RWD), defined as routinely collected healthcare data, can be a potential catalyst for addressing challenges faced in clinical trials. We performed a scoping review of database-specific RWD applications within clinical trial contexts, synthesizing prominent uses and themes.

Materials and methods

Querying 3 biomedical literature databases, research articles using electronic health records, administrative claims databases, or clinical registries either within a clinical trial or in tandem with methodology related to clinical trials were included. Articles were required to use at least 1 US RWD source. All abstract screening, full-text screening, and data extraction was performed by 1 reviewer. Two reviewers independently verified all decisions.

Results

Of 2020 screened articles, 89 qualified: 59 articles used electronic health records, 29 used administrative claims, and 26 used registries. Our synthesis was driven by the general life cycle of a clinical trial, culminating into 3 major themes: trial process tasks (51 articles); dissemination strategies (6); and generalizability assessments (34). Despite a diverse set of diseases studied, <10% of trials using RWD for trial process tasks evaluated medications or procedures (5/51). All articles highlighted data-related challenges, such as missing values.

Discussion

Database-specific RWD have been occasionally leveraged for various clinical trial tasks. We observed underuse of RWD within conducted medication or procedure trials, though it is subject to the confounder of implicit report of RWD use.

Conclusion

Enhanced incorporation of RWD should be further explored for medication or procedure trials, including better understanding of how to handle related data quality issues to facilitate RWD use.

SUBMITTER: Rogers JR

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7810452 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundOmalizumab was approved for the treatment of chronic idiopathic urticaria (CIU)/chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) in the United States in March 2014.ObjectiveThis study sought to describe real-world omalizumab use, in the United States, in a large cohort of patients with CIU/CSU.MethodsPatients with CIU/CSU (ages ≥12 years) initiated on omalizumab (index date) with ≥12 months of pre- and postindex data were identified in the an insurance claims data base (January 1, 2013, to July 31, 2016). Treatment patterns, including the dosing regimen and continuous use of omalizumab (no gaps for ≥60 days), were described during the 12-month postindex follow-up period.ResultsA total of 1546 patients (mean ± standard deviation [SD] ages, 44 ± 14.5 years; 73.1% women) were identified. Most of the patients (84.5%) were initiated on omalizumab 300-mg dose; 90% maintained the initial dose, 7.5% had a dose increase, and 4.6% had a dose decrease. The mean ± SD omalizumab treatment duration was 9.1 ± 3.8 months, the mean ± SD number of omalizumab administrations was 8.3 ± 4.8, and the mean ± SD administration frequency was 44 ± 29 days. A proportion of the patients continuously treated with omalizumab for 6, 9, and 12 months was 67.3, 54.8, and 47.4%, respectively. Among the patients who discontinued omalizumab for ≥3 months (39.8%), 21% restarted the treatment after a mean ± SD of 4.4 ± 1.3 months. The proportion of patients who used other CIU/CSU-related medications decreased pre- to postindex (94.8 to 81.1%), with the highest decrease observed in oral corticosteroids (75.7 to 49.9%).ConclusionIn this large real-world study, the majority of the patients with CIU/CSU were initiated on a 300-mg omalizumab dose and treated without titration up or down for 9 months on average. Most of the patients were continuously treated with omalizumab for ≥6 months, and one-fourth of the patients who discontinued treatment resumed it. Moreover, compared with baseline levels, the use of other CIU/CSU-related medications was lower after omalizumab initiation, with the most prominent decrease observed in oral corticosteroids.

Project description:IntroductionThe first cardiovascular safety trial in the sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitor drug class, the Empagliflozin Cardiovascular Outcomes and Mortality in Type 2 Diabetes (EMPA-REG OUTCOME) trial, demonstrated significant cardiovascular risk reduction with empagliflozin. It is currently not clear what proportions of people with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) have the same high cardiovascular risk as those included in the trial, and will therefore be likely to experience the same cardiovascular benefit. We aimed to identify and describe the proportion of people with T2DM from a representative English national population who have the comparable high cardiovascular risk to those included in the EMPA-REG trial.MethodA cross-sectional analysis of cardiovascular risk in people with T2DM and a subgroup prescribed SGLT2 inhibitors. Patients were identified from the Royal College of General Practitioners Research and Surveillance Centre database. Cardiovascular risk factors were identified from electronic patient records.ResultsFrom 1,238,909 patients at 128 GP practices, we identified 60,327 adults with T2DM (mean age 66.1 years, SD 13.9) of whom 55.6% were male. From these 1642 (2.7%) people had been initiated on an SGLT2 inhibitor (mean age 58.1 years, SD 10.4; 58.8% male). In the complete T2DM group only 15.7% (95% CI 15.5-16.0%) had the same high cardiovascular risk as those included in the EMPA-REG trial. In those already initiated on SGLT2 inhibitors this proportion was 11.1% (95% CI 9.8-12.4%). Whilst the proportion was higher in the oldest age groups, in those 70+ years old less than a quarter met the EMPA-REG trial high cardiovascular risk criteria.ConclusionsThe EMPA-REG trial results are applicable only to a small proportion of people with T2DM and a smaller proportion of those currently treated with SGLT2 inhibitors. Additional data are required to identify any cardiovascular benefit in people with lower cardiovascular risk.FundingAstraZeneca.

Project description:BackgroundSepsis management guidelines endorse use of biomarkers to support clinical assessment and treatment decisions in septic patients. The impact of biomarkers on improving patient outcomes remains uncertain.MethodsRetrospective observational study of adult sepsis discharges between January 1, 2012, and December 31, 2015, from Premier Healthcare Database hospitals. Sepsis was defined by an All Patients Refined Diagnosis-Related Group code of 720 (septicemia and disseminated infections). Use of four biomarker strategies was evaluated based on hospital records: (i) >1 procalcitonin (PCT), (ii) 1 PCT, (iii) no PCT but ≥1 C-reactive protein (CRP) and/or lactate and (iv) no sepsis biomarkers. Associations between biomarker use and clinical and cost outcomes were examined. The primary outcome was impact of biomarker strategy on hospital costs per day.ResultsAmong 933,591 adult sepsis discharges during the study period, 731,392 (78%) had biomarker tests ordered. In multivariable analyses, discharges with >1 PCT had higher hospital costs per day ($1,904; 95% confidence interval [CI] $1,896-$1,911) compared with discharges with no sepsis biomarkers ($1,606; 95% CI $1,658-$1,664). Discharges with >1 PCT also had greater illness severity and antimicrobial exposure compared with other biomarker-use groups. The adjusted odds of dying during hospital stay compared with being discharged were significantly lower for sepsis discharges with >1 PCT (0.64; 95% CI 0.61-0.67) and 1 PCT (0.88; 95% CI 0.85-0.91) compared with no sepsis biomarker use. The proportion of discharges with ≥1 PCT increased almost six-fold during the study; use of other biomarkers remained constant.ConclusionsBetween 2012 and 2015, PCT use among sepsis discharges increased six-fold while lactate and CRP use remained unchanged. PCT use was associated with decreased odds of in-hospital mortality but increased hospital costs per day. Serial biomarker monitoring may be associated with improved patient outcomes in the most critically ill septic patients.

Project description:BackgroundDigoxin is indicated for the management of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and atrial fibrillation. Despite stronger guideline recommendations for other pharmacologic and device therapies, digoxin retains a role in select patients unable to tolerate or refractory to standard therapies. Contemporary utilization of and costs related to digoxin in the United States of America (USA) remain uncharacterized. The objective of this study was to estimate trends in digoxin use and expenditures across the USA from 2010 to 2017.MethodsWe utilized the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey to estimate trends in digoxin use and expenditures across the USA from 2010 to 2017. The Medical Expenditure Panel Survey is an overlapping panel survey that interviews households in the USA to ascertain their healthcare utilization and expenditures. Complex sampling procedures allow for nationally representative estimates of utilization and expenditures. We report the number of digoxin users and expenditures across key subgroups in 2-year increments from 2010 to 2017.ResultsThe number of digoxin users in the USA declined by 47% from 766 users per 100,000 adults in 2010-11 to 402 users per 100,000 adults in 2016-17. While digoxin use declined among women and self-identified White adults, adults living at or below the federal poverty level and those who self-identified as Asian or Hispanic represent an increasing proportion of overall digoxin users. While nationwide digoxin expenditures declined by 26% from 2010-11 to 2012-13, they peaked at $260.3 million in 2014-15 and remained elevated at $188.7 million in 2016-17.ConclusionsDespite a nationwide trend towards declining use, digoxin remains prevalent amongst people of Asian and Hispanic descent in the USA. After a spike in cost in 2013, digoxin prices have yet to return to pre-spike levels. The role of digoxin in contemporary heart failure and arrhythmia management will continue to evolve as additional randomized and observational analyses become available.