slide1 n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Octo ber 2013 PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Octo ber 2013

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 41

Octo ber 2013 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 82 Views
  • Uploaded on

Octo ber 2013. DIA Clinical Forum Workshop. Pamela Tenaerts. The Clinical Trials Transformation Initiative . P ublic private partnership co-founded by Duke and FDA in late 2007 All stakeholders involved Through a MOU with FDA, Duke convenes the initiative Mission

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Octo ber 2013' - tausiq


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
slide1
October 2013

DIA Clinical Forum Workshop

Pamela Tenaerts

the clinical trials transformation initiative
The Clinical Trials Transformation Initiative
  • Public private partnership co-founded by Duke and FDA in late 2007
  • All stakeholders involved
  • Through a MOU with FDA, Duke convenes the initiative

Mission

To identify and promote practices that will increase the quality and efficiency of clinical trials

Vision

A high quality clinical trial system that is patient-centered and efficient, enabling reliable and timely access to evidence-based prevention and treatment options

why ctti formed
Why CTTI Formed

 U.S. clinical trials in crisis

  • Trial start-up times lengthening
  • Enrollment slowing
  • Costs increasing
  • Many investigators pulling out of clinical research

 Increasing need for reliable evidence

  • To evaluate new devices, drugs, biologics
  • To determine best medical practice
  • To compare effectiveness of diagnostic and therapeutic alternatives
need for reliable evidence from clinical trials
Need for reliable evidence from clinical trials
  • Essential for appropriate decision making concerning the benefits and risks associated with clinical interventions.
  • Decisions made in the absence of reliable evidence may harm individual patients and public health
    • relevant trials have never been performed
    • trials that have been performed were poorly designed or conducted
    • trials have been performed but results are not known
strategy
Strategy

Identify and shape potentialtransformational changesto the system

Seekincremental improvements to current system

Consider portfolio improvements of clinical trials being done relative to public health needs

how does ctti seek to effect incremental change
How does CTTI seek to effect incremental change?
  • Involve all sectors in selection, conduct, and interpretation of projects
  • Identify and eliminate activities in the conduct of trials that do not add value
  • Understand incentives to maintain non-value-added activities
  • Maintain an open and respectful dialogue across sectors
  • Develop solutions that are mindful of the needs of patients and all sectors in the clinical research enterprise
organization
Organization

Provides oversight and strategic direction

Gives input into strategy and project selection. Conducts projects and develops strategies for implementation of project results

Engages patient advocates as integral part of CTTI activities

Support projects and organization in pursuit of mission

Executive Committee (EC)

Steering Committee (SC)

(member organizations representatives)

Patient Leadership

Council (PLC)

CTTI Staff

ec members
EC Members

Co-chairs

Robert Califf (Duke) Rachel Sherman (FDA/CDER)

Members

Hans-Georg Eichler (EMA) Richard Platt (Harvard)

Dalvir Gill (TransCelerate) Nancy Roach (Patient Rep)

Louis Jacques (CMS) Jean Rouleau (Montreal Heart)

Richard Kuntz (Medtronic) Joe Selby (PCORI)

Michael Lauer (NIH/NHLBI) Robert Temple (FDA/CDER)

Elliott Levy (BMS, SC rep) Veronica Todaro(PLC rep)

Freda Lewis-Hall (Pfizer) Tom Walley (NIHR)

Deven McGraw (CDT) Bram Zuckerman (FDA/CDRH)

Briggs Morrison (AstraZeneca)

patient engagement
Patient Engagement
  • Patient representatives serving on Steering Committee and Executive Committee
  • Included in workshops, expert meetings, and projects

CTTI’s Patient Leadership Council (PLC)

  • Collective voice with patient advocacy organizations (PAO) and voluntary health agencies (VHA) to work together to affect systemic improvement within the clinical trials enterprise
  • Initiate patient-driven panels, events and projects that improve the quality and efficiency of clinical trials
patient engagement1
Patient Engagement

In 2012, CTTI conducted interviews with key thought leaders in patient advocacy to gain an understanding of the patient perspective on clinical trials.

Issues were raised around:

  • Informed consent
  • Inefficiencies in the system such as multiple IRB reviews
  • Waste of patient time and participation
  • Lack of access to research findings
  • Lack of meaningful inclusion of patient advocates in the clinical trial enterprise from study design to dissemination of research results
finances
Finances
  • Financial resources from public and private sources
    • annual membership fees
      • infrastructure and projects
    • FDA cooperative agreement
      • additional support for projects
  • In kind contributions of effort from FDA and membership organizations
slide13

Why CTTI Works

“Because of the broad array of engaged stakeholders, CTTI is in a unique position to drive major changes in the clinical trial system in the midst of massive global reforms.”

Rachel Sherman, M.D.,

Director for the Office of Medical Policy at the FDA’s CDER

Co-chair of the CTTI Executive Committee

key ctti accomplishments
Key CTTI Accomplishments
  • Generated evidence and formulated implementable recommendations that have informed regulatory guidance
  • Created an inclusive forum that is influencing policy
  • Increased patients’ voice to improve clinical research
  • Raised questions about the portfolio of clinical trials as it relates to public health needs
future direction
Future Direction
  • Focused on transformation
  • Strong, balanced portfolio of projects that inform and support policies and practices
    • Continue needed incremental improvements
    • Assist in transforming trials by better integrating clinical research with clinical practice
    • Larger number of projects/initiatives
  • Better engagement of stakeholders to facilitate meaningful change (members, patients, collaborators)
portfolio of ctti projects
Portfolio of CTTI Projects

PROJECT PORTFOLIO – September 2013

gcp training
GCP Training

PROJECT PORTFOLIO – September 2013

informed consent
Informed Consent

PROJECT PORTFOLIO – September 2013

large simple trials
Large Simple Trials

PROJECT PORTFOLIO – September 2013

patient engagement2
Patient Engagement

PROJECT PORTFOLIO – September 2013

recruitment and retention
Recruitment and Retention

PROJECT PORTFOLIO – September 2013

site metrics
Site Metrics

PROJECT PORTFOLIO – September 2013

state of clinical trials
State of Clinical Trials

PROJECT PORTFOLIO – September 2013

uses of electronic data
Uses of Electronic Data

PROJECT PORTFOLIO – September 2013

safety projects
Safety Projects
  • Original SAE project (2009-2010)
  • IND Safety Assessment and Communication
  • SAE case studies project
2009 11 ctti project
2009-11 CTTI Project
  • Focused on expedited reporting from sponsors to site investigators
  • Investigators had complained of a large volume of expedited reports that were not interpretable as individual cases
  • Recommendations:
    • Decrease the volume of uninterpretable and irrelevant safety reports to investigators
    • Supply investigators with meaningful reports that would improve investigators’ understanding of a drug’s safety (benefit-risk) profile.
    • Engage patient groups to discuss optimal systems for safety reporting to investigators and patients during the conduct of a trial; re-evaluate consent language
ind safety assessment and communication project
IND Safety Assessment and Communication Project

September 29, 2010: FDA issued a Final Rule on IND safety reporting (effective 3/28/2011)

FDA intended to reduce the number of uninterpretable reports by clarifying sponsor and investigator responsibilities in reporting and analysis of serious, unexpected events suspected to be caused by the drug

fda s final ind safety rule
FDA’s final IND safety rule

FDA specified that sponsors should report serious events in an expedited fashion only if the sponsor judged that there was evidence to suggest a causal relationship between the drug and the event

Stated purpose: enhance the ability of sponsors, FDA, investigators, and IRBs to focus on important safety issues

concerns raised by sponsors regarding the final ind safety rule
Concerns raised by sponsors regarding the final IND safety rule
  • Responsibility for determining causality- not harmonized globally
    • US: Sponsor’s determination of causality should drive decision on reporting
    • EMA: If either sponsor or investigator considers the event causally associated, it should be reported
  • Methodological questions regarding assessment of causal associations across a development program
safety case studies
Safety Case Studies

PROJECT PORTFOLIO – September 2013

central irb advancement
Central IRB Advancement

PROJECT PORTFOLIO– September 2013

monitoring project
Monitoring Project

Goal

Identify best practices and provide sensible criteria to help sponsors select the most appropriate monitoring methods for a clinical trial, thereby ensuring reliable and informative trial results and human subjects’ protection

Work stream 1: Describe the range of current monitoring practices and examine factors that drive their adoption

Work stream 2: Define key quality objectives for monitoring clinical trials

Work stream 3: Examine ways to build quality into trials to enable more focused and efficient monitoring

ws1 survey of monitoring practices
WS1: Survey of Monitoring Practices

Results consistent with hypotheses:

Wide variety of monitoring practices in use

Choice of monitoring approach depends on type of organizational sponsor

Rationale for using any specific monitoring approach does not appear to be evidence-based

ws2 key quality objectives
WS2: Key Quality Objectives

Major quality objectives are to

Protect participant rights, safety and wellbeing

Ensure the reliability of the study results

Maintain adherence to the protocol

Monitoring also provides

An opportunity for focused training

Feedback that can improve study processes

ws3 building quality into trials
WS3: Building Quality into Trials

Primary focus should shift from post-hoc monitoring / inspection to incorporation of quality into the scientific and operational design of a trial

No single monitoring approach is appropriate or necessary in all circumstances

Monitoring approach (which may combine several methods) should be tailored to the needs of the particular clinical trial

ws3 building quality into trials1
WS3: Building Quality into Trials

Focus on what is important:

  • Importance of proper randomization
    • no foreknowledge of likely treatment allocation
    • minimize post-randomization withdrawals
    • minimize loss to follow-up
  • Sufficient numbers of relevant clinical outcomes
  • Unbiased ascertainment and analysis of study outcomes
ws3 building quality into trials2
WS3: Building Quality into Trials

Oversight should focus on those errors most likely to adversely affect trial quality:

Data elements vary in their impact on the safety of participants or on the reliability of trial results

Single-minded focus on checking/ensuring accuracy of every data point is misguided

Sponsors and regulators should agree up front what data points are critical and need to be verified

Sponsor should institute metricsto prospectively ensure the quality of critical data

recommendation
Recommendation

Build quality into the scientific and operational design and conduct of clinical trials

  • Focus on what matters
  • Develop a quality management plan
  • Assess performance in important parameters
  • Improve training and procedures
  • Report findings of quality management approach