Using Real-World Data to Rationalize Clinical Trials Eligibility Criteria Design: A Case Study of Alzheimer's Disease Trials.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Li Q
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8075542 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:There is a growing focus on making clinical trials more inclusive but the design of trial eligibility criteria remains challenging1-3. Here we systematically evaluate the effect of different eligibility criteria on cancer trial populations and outcomes with real-world data using the computational framework of Trial Pathfinder. We apply Trial Pathfinder to emulate completed trials of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer using data from a nationwide database of electronic health records comprising 61,094 patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. Our analyses reveal that many common criteria, including exclusions based on several laboratory values, had a minimal effect on the trial hazard ratios. When we used a data-driven approach to broaden restrictive criteria, the pool of eligible patients more than doubled on average and the hazard ratio of the overall survival decreased by an average of 0.05. This suggests that many patients who were not eligible under the original trial criteria could potentially benefit from the treatments. We further support our findings through analyses of other types of cancer and patient-safety data from diverse clinical trials. Our data-driven methodology for evaluating eligibility criteria can facilitate the design of more-inclusive trials while maintaining safeguards for patient safety.
| S-EPMC9007176 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundEven though clinical trials are indispensable for medical research, they are frequently impaired by delayed or incomplete patient recruitment, resulting in cost overruns or aborted studies. Study protocols based on real-world data with precisely expressed eligibility criteria and realistic cohort estimations are crucial for successful study execution. The increasing availability of routine clinical data in electronic health records (EHRs) provides the opportunity to also support patient recruitment during the prescreening phase. While solutions for electronic recruitment support have been published, to our knowledge, no method for the prioritization of eligibility criteria in this context has been explored.MethodsIn the context of the Electronic Health Records for Clinical Research (EHR4CR) project, we examined the eligibility criteria of the KATHERINE trial. Criteria were extracted from the study protocol, deduplicated, and decomposed. A paper chart review and data warehouse query were executed to retrieve clinical data for the resulting set of simplified criteria separately from both sources. Criteria were scored according to disease specificity, data availability, and discriminatory power based on their content and the clinical dataset.ResultsThe study protocol contained 35 eligibility criteria, which after simplification yielded 70 atomic criteria. For a cohort of 106 patients with breast cancer and neoadjuvant treatment, 47.9% of data elements were captured through paper chart review, with the data warehouse query yielding 26.9% of data elements. Score application resulted in a prioritized subset of 17 criteria, which yielded a sensitivity of 1.00 and specificity 0.57 on EHR data (paper charts, 1.00 and 0.80) compared with actual recruitment in the trial.ConclusionIt is possible to prioritize clinical trial eligibility criteria based on real-world data to optimize prescreening of patients on a selected subset of relevant and available criteria and reduce implementation efforts for recruitment support. The performance could be further improved by increasing EHR data coverage.
| S-EPMC7806423 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionTo generalize safety and efficacy findings, it is essential that diverse populations are well represented in Alzheimer's disease (AD) drug trials. In this review, we aimed to investigate participant diversity in disease-modifying AD trials over time, and the frequencies of participant eligibility criteria.MethodsA systematic review was performed using Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Clinicaltrials.gov, identifying 2247 records.ResultsIn the 101 included AD trials, participants were predominantly White (median percentage: 94.7%, interquartile range: 81.0-96.7%); and this percentage showed no significant increase or decrease over time (2001-2019). Eligibility criteria such as exclusion of persons with psychiatric illness (78.2%), cardiovascular disease (71.3%) and cerebrovascular disease (68.3%), obligated caregiver attendance (80.2%), and specific Mini-Mental State Examination scores (90.1%; no significant increase/decrease over time) may have led to a disproportionate exclusion of ethnoracially diverse individuals.DiscussionEthnoracially diverse participants continue to be underrepresented in AD clinical trials. Several recommendations are provided to broaden eligibility criteria.
| S-EPMC8964823 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe results of clinical trials in metastatic breast cancer (MBC) are generalized to real-world patients. This study determines the proportion of real-world patients who would be eligible for clinical trials and compares outcomes in eligible versus ineligible patients.MethodsPatients diagnosed with MBC from 2004 to 2015 in a large Canadian province were included. Patients with one of the following criteria were considered ineligible: the presence of comorbid conditions (anemia, uncontrolled diabetes, heart disease, liver disease, and kidney disease) or a history of immunosuppression or prior malignancy. The likelihood of receiving cancer therapy was analysed using logistic regression models and factors affecting overall survival (OS) were assessed by Cox proportional hazards models.ResultsA total of 1585 patients with MBC were identified. The median age at diagnosis was 63 years. Of these, 512 (32.3%) patients were deemed ineligible in whom the two most common reasons for ineligibility were renal dysfunction (17.2%), and previous immunosuppression (7.8%). In the real world, ineligible patients were less likely to receive chemotherapy (29.5% vs 45.8%; P < 0.001) but not radiation treatment (7.6% vs 9.6%; P = 0.196) or hormonal therapy (57.6% vs 60.6%; P = 0.261). The 5-year OS of ineligible patients who received systemic therapy in the real-world was significantly better than those who did not.ConclusionsDespite being ineligible for clinical trials based on common eligibility criteria, many real-world patients receive systemic treatment and derive possible benefit. Broadening of inclusion criteria in clinical trials will enhance the representation of real-world patients and increase the generalizability of results.
| S-EPMC7586241 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundClinical trials are vital for developing new therapies but can also delay drug development. Efficient trial data management, optimized trial protocol, and accurate patient identification are critical for reducing trial timelines. Natural language processing (NLP) has the potential to achieve these objectives.ObjectiveThis study aims to assess the feasibility of using data-driven approaches to optimize clinical trial protocol design and identify eligible patients. This involves creating a comprehensive eligibility criteria knowledge base integrated within electronic health records using deep learning-based NLP techniques.MethodsWe obtained data of 3281 industry-sponsored phase 2 or 3 interventional clinical trials recruiting patients with non-small cell lung cancer, prostate cancer, breast cancer, multiple myeloma, ulcerative colitis, and Crohn disease from ClinicalTrials.gov, spanning the period between 2013 and 2020. A customized bidirectional long short-term memory- and conditional random field-based NLP pipeline was used to extract all eligibility criteria attributes and convert hypernym concepts into computable hyponyms along with their corresponding values. To illustrate the simulation of clinical trial design for optimization purposes, we selected a subset of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (n=2775), curated from the Mount Sinai Health System, as a pilot study.ResultsWe manually annotated the clinical trial eligibility corpus (485/3281, 14.78% trials) and constructed an eligibility criteria-specific ontology. Our customized NLP pipeline, developed based on the eligibility criteria-specific ontology that we created through manual annotation, achieved high precision (0.91, range 0.67-1.00) and recall (0.79, range 0.50-1) scores, as well as a high F1-score (0.83, range 0.67-1), enabling the efficient extraction of granular criteria entities and relevant attributes from 3281 clinical trials. A standardized eligibility criteria knowledge base, compatible with electronic health records, was developed by transforming hypernym concepts into machine-interpretable hyponyms along with their corresponding values. In addition, an interface prototype demonstrated the practicality of leveraging real-world data for optimizing clinical trial protocols and identifying eligible patients.ConclusionsOur customized NLP pipeline successfully generated a standardized eligibility criteria knowledge base by transforming hypernym criteria into machine-readable hyponyms along with their corresponding values. A prototype interface integrating real-world patient information allows us to assess the impact of each eligibility criterion on the number of patients eligible for the trial. Leveraging NLP and real-world data in a data-driven approach holds promise for streamlining the overall clinical trial process, optimizing processes, and improving efficiency in patient identification.
| S-EPMC11319878 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThis research aims to evaluate the impact of eligibility criteria on recruitment and observable clinical outcomes of COVID-19 clinical trials using electronic health record (EHR) data.Materials and methodsOn June 18, 2020, we identified frequently used eligibility criteria from all the interventional COVID-19 trials in ClinicalTrials.gov (n = 288), including age, pregnancy, oxygen saturation, alanine/aspartate aminotransferase, platelets, and estimated glomerular filtration rate. We applied the frequently used criteria to the EHR data of COVID-19 patients in Columbia University Irving Medical Center (CUIMC) (March 2020-June 2020) and evaluated their impact on patient accrual and the occurrence of a composite endpoint of mechanical ventilation, tracheostomy, and in-hospital death.ResultsThere were 3251 patients diagnosed with COVID-19 from the CUIMC EHR included in the analysis. The median follow-up period was 10 days (interquartile range 4-28 days). The composite events occurred in 18.1% (n = 587) of the COVID-19 cohort during the follow-up. In a hypothetical trial with common eligibility criteria, 33.6% (690/2051) were eligible among patients with evaluable data and 22.2% (153/690) had the composite event.DiscussionBy adjusting the thresholds of common eligibility criteria based on the characteristics of COVID-19 patients, we could observe more composite events from fewer patients.ConclusionsThis research demonstrated the potential of using the EHR data of COVID-19 patients to inform the selection of eligibility criteria and their thresholds, supporting data-driven optimization of participant selection towards improved statistical power of COVID-19 trials.
| S-EPMC7798960 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To automatically identify and cluster clinical trials with similar eligibility features.Using the public repository ClinicalTrials.gov as the data source, we extracted semantic features from the eligibility criteria text of all clinical trials and constructed a trial-feature matrix. We calculated the pairwise similarities for all clinical trials based on their eligibility features. For all trials, by selecting one trial as the center each time, we identified trials whose similarities to the central trial were greater than or equal to a predefined threshold and constructed center-based clusters. Then we identified unique trial sets with distinctive trial membership compositions from center-based clusters by disregarding their structural information.From the 145,745 clinical trials on ClinicalTrials.gov, we extracted 5,508,491 semantic features. Of these, 459,936 were unique and 160,951 were shared by at least one pair of trials. Crowdsourcing the cluster evaluation using Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk), we identified the optimal similarity threshold, 0.9. Using this threshold, we generated 8806 center-based clusters. Evaluation of a sample of the clusters by MTurk resulted in a mean score 4.331±0.796 on a scale of 1-5 (5 indicating "strongly agree that the trials in the cluster are similar").We contribute an automated approach to clustering clinical trials with similar eligibility features. This approach can be potentially useful for investigating knowledge reuse patterns in clinical trial eligibility criteria designs and for improving clinical trial recruitment. We also contribute an effective crowdsourcing method for evaluating informatics interventions.
| S-EPMC4119097 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To assess the effect of eligibility criteria on exclusion rates, generalizability, and outcome heterogeneity in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) clinical trials and to assess the value of a risk-based inclusion criterion. A literature search was performed to summarize the eligibility criteria of clinical trials. The extracted criteria were applied to an incidence cohort of 2,904 consecutive patients with ALS to quantify their effects on generalizability and outcome heterogeneity. We evaluated the effect of a risk-based selection approach on trial design using a personalized survival prediction model. We identified 38 trials. A large variability exists between trials in all patient characteristics for enrolled patients (p < 0.001), except for the proportion of men (p = 0.21). Exclusion rates varied widely (from 14% to 95%; mean 59.8%; 95% confidence interval 52.6%-66.7%). Stratification of the eligible populations into prognostic subgroups showed that eligibility criteria lead to exclusion of patients in all prognostic groups. Eligibility criteria neither reduce heterogeneity in survival time (from 22.0 to 20.5 months, p = 0.09) nor affect between-patient variability in functional decline (from 0.62 to 0.65, p = 0.25). In none of the 38 trials were the eligibility criteria found to be more efficient than the prediction model in optimizing sample size and eligibility rate. The majority of patients with ALS are excluded from trial participation, which questions the generalizability of trial results. Eligibility criteria only minimally improve homogeneity in trial endpoints. An individualized risk-based criterion could be used to balance the gains in trial design and loss in generalizability.
| S-EPMC6369899 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Clinical trials are essential for determining whether new interventions are effective. In order to determine the eligibility of patients to enroll into these trials, clinical trial coordinators often perform a manual review of clinical notes in the electronic health record of patients. This is a very time-consuming and exhausting task. Efforts in this process can be expedited if these coordinators are directed toward specific parts of the text that are relevant for eligibility determination. In this study, we describe the creation of a dataset that can be used to evaluate automated methods capable of identifying sentences in a note that are relevant for screening a patient's eligibility in clinical trials. Using this dataset, we also present results for four simple methods in natural language processing that can be used to automate this task. We found that this is a challenging task (maximum F-score=26.25), but it is a promising direction for further research.
| S-EPMC4978353 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeUsing real-world data (RWD)-based trial simulation approach, we aim to simulate colorectal cancer (CRC) trials and examine both effectiveness and safety end points in different simulation scenarios.MethodsWe identified five phase III trials comparing new treatment regimens with an US Food and Drug Administration-approved first-line treatment in patients with metastatic CRC (ie, fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan) as the standard-of-care (SOC) control arm. Using Electronic Health Record-derived data from the OneFlorida network, we defined the study populations and outcome measures using the protocols from the original trials. Our design scenarios were (1) simulation of the SOC fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan arm and (2) comparative effectiveness research (CER) simulation of the control and experimental arms. For each scenario, we adjusted for random assignment, sampling, and dropout. We used overall survival (OS) and severe adverse events (SAEs) to measure effectiveness and safety.ResultsWe conducted CER simulations for two trials, and SOC simulations for three trials. The effect sizes of our simulated trials were stable across all simulation runs. Compared with the original trials, we observed longer OS and higher mean number of SAEs in both CER and SOC simulation. In the two CER simulations, hazard ratios associated with death from simulations were similar to that reported in the original trials. Consistent with the original trials, we found higher risk ratios of SAEs in the experiment arm, suggesting potentially higher toxicities from the new treatment regimen. We also observed similar SAE rates across all simulations compared with the original trials.ConclusionIn this study, we simulated five CRC trials, and tested two simulation scenarios with several different configurations demonstrated that our simulations can robustly generate effectiveness and safety outcomes comparable with the original trials using real-world data.
| S-EPMC9848597 | biostudies-literature