May 17, 2019: The VITamin D and OmegA-3 TriaL (VITAL): Design and Results of a Large Pragmatic Trial (JoAnn E. Manson, MD, DrPH)

Speaker

JoAnn E. Manson, MD, DrPH
Chief, Division of Preventive Medicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital
Professor of Medicine and the Michael and Lee Bell Professor of Women’s Health
Harvard Medical School
Professor, Department of Epidemiology
Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health

Topic

The VITamin D and OmegA-3 TriaL (VITAL): Design and Results of a Large Pragmatic Trial

Keywords

Pragmatic clinical trial; Dietary supplements; Primary prevention; Mail-based randomized clinical trial; Cancer prevention; Cardiovascular disease prevention; vitamin D; Omega-3 fatty acids

Key Points

  • The VITAL pragmatic trial evaluated the effects of dietary supplements (vitamin D and omega-3) on reducing risk for developing cancer, heart disease, and stroke in the general population.
  • Study recruitment involved nationwide and targeted mailings, media reports, advertising, and brochures. Retention included participant newsletters, incentive gifts, and honoraria.
  • Findings included that neither omega-3s nor vitamin D significantly reduced the primary endpoints of major cardiovascular disease events or total invasive cancer. Omega-3s did reduce total myocardial infarction by 28%, with greatest reductions in those with low dietary fish intake and in African Americans.

Discussion Themes

VITAL’s hybrid design—remote or mail-based intervention plus serial in-clinic visits in a sample—has advantages in promoting quality and cost-efficiency.

Next steps for VITAL include continued follow-up for 5 years; genetic studies; and fostering new ancillary studies through nationwide collaborations.  

Visit the VITAL study website and read more about the results of VITAL (Manson et al., New Engl J Med, 2019)

Tags

#dietarysupplements, #pctGR, @Collaboratory1

April 19, 2019: Trauma Survivors Outcomes & Support (TSOS) Pragmatic Trial: Revisiting Effectiveness & Implementation Aims (Doug Zatzick, MD)

Speaker

Doug Zatzick, MD
Professor of Psychiatry
Harborview Medical Center
University of Washington School of Medicine

Topic

Trauma Survivors Outcomes & Support (TSOS) Pragmatic Trial: Revisiting Effectiveness & Implementation Aims

Keywords

Trauma outcomes; Demonstration Project; Hybrid study design; Implementation science; Pragmatic clinical trial; Cluster randomization; Stepped-wedge design; Posttraumatic stress disorder; PRECIS-2; Mental health intervention

Key Points

  • The TSOS Demonstration Project is a cluster-randomized, stepped-wedge trial conducted at 25 U.S. trauma centers. The intervention involves an electronic health record PTSD screen and a baseline PTSD and comorbidity assessment. TSOS is turned on at each site across 4 “waves.”
  • During the course of this hybrid effectiveness-implementation trial, two domains on PRECIS-2 (Pragmatic-Explanatory Continuum Indicator Summary) were scored as more pragmatic and one domain as more explanatory than at the outset of the study.
  • The study team developed a methodology for assessing TSOS implementation aims. Called RAPICE (Rapid Assessment Procedure Informed Clinical Ethnography), the method yielded findings around recurrent intervention and research staff turnover across sites; observations that some patients do not engage in the intervention; and ways to inform a priori secondary hypotheses that suggest per-protocol modifications to the original intention-to-treat analyses.
  • TSOS will present results at the 2020 summit of the American College of Surgeons with the potential to integrate findings into the College’s regulatory and verification processes.

Discussion Themes

Regarding the need to collect outcome data, there may be an important distinction between two aspects of “pragmatic.” That is, while collecting outcome data makes a trial more expensive (one aspect of pragmatic), it doesn’t necessarily affect relevance or generalizability (another, more important, aspect of pragmatic).

Might there be studies which, by design, are not aiming to be on the outer [more pragmatic] spokes of the PRECIS-2 wheel?

Read more about the TSOS Demonstration Project.

Tags

#pctGR, @Collaboratory1, @PRECIS_2

Podcast April 16: Development of Harmonized Outcome Measures for Use in Research and Clinical Practice

Podcast April 16: Development of Harmonized Outcome Measures for Use in Research and Clinical Practice (Michelle Leavy, MPH, Elise Berliner, PhD)

In this episode of the NIH Collaboratory Grand Rounds podcast, Dr. Adrian Hernandez sits down with Dr. Elise Berliner and Michelle Leavy to discuss the Development of Harmonized Outcome Measures for Use in Research and Clinical Practice. In the discussion, Dr. Berliner and Leavy explain the outcome measures framework and harmonizing outcomes in specific clinical areas.

Click on the recording below to listen to the podcast.

Want to hear more? View the full Grand Rounds presentation.

For alerts about new episodes, subscribe free on iTunes or SoundCloud.

Read the transcript. 

Rate this podcast

April 15, 2019: Registration Now Open for Workshop on the Design & Analysis of Embedded Pragmatic Clinical Trials (ePCT)

The NIH Health Care Systems Research Collaboratory is hosting a one-day workshop on the Design & Analysis of Embedded Pragmatic Clinical Trials (ePCTs) on May 2, 2019, in the Lister Hill Auditorium on the NIH Campus.

The workshop will include a series of moderated discussions that focus on issues of measuring trial outcomes from available data sources, potential randomization strategies, specific ePCT design considerations, and unique challenges associated with ePCTs. Panel discussions will utilize case examples from the Collaboratory repertoire and beyond to illustrate how clinical investigators and biostatisticians work to address research questions posed by specific trials.

The Workshop Website provides information on meeting logistics, agenda, and registration. There is also an option to attend the workshop remotely via the NIH Videoconference Center, and those details are also available at the Workshop Website.

March 8, 2019: Dietary Trials in Heart Failure: SODIUM-HF (Justin Ezekowitz, MBBCh, MSc)

Video coming soon

Speaker

Justin A. Ezekowitz, MBBCh, MSc
Professor, University of Alberta
Co-Director, Canadian VIGOUR Centre
Cardiologist, Mazankowski Alberta Heart Institute

Topic

Dietary Trials in Heart Failure: SODIUM-HF

Keywords

Multicenter clinical trial; Heart failure; Dietary sodium; Cardiovascular health; Clinical equipoise; Clinical guidelines; SODIUM-HF

Key Points

  • The SODIUM-HF trial is a multicenter, multinational dietary study evaluating the long-term effects of a low-sodium diet in patients with heart failure on a composite clinical outcome of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular (CV) hospitalizations, and CV emergency department visits.
  • The recommended amount of dietary sodium for patients with heart failure varies among the guidelines, ranging from no restriction to <2300mg per day.
  • Among the successes of the study are the important research question, a simple electronic case report form, engaged clinicians and staff, 100% remote monitoring, and a low administrative burden.

Discussion Themes

Sodium restriction is one of the most challenging things for patients to undertake as it affects their lifestyle significantly.

What is your perspective on the importance of a low-sodium diet for patients with heart failure, given that low sodium was shown to be harmful in some studies?

How do you balance wanting a pragmatic/practical intervention versus wanting a rigorous test of your hypothesis?

For more information on this study, visit the SODIUM-HF trial website and ClinicalTrials.gov.

Tags

#HeartFailure, #pctGR, @SodiumHF, @Collaboratory1, @JustinEzekowitz, @CVC_UAlberta

March 1, 2019: Approaches to Patient Follow-Up for Clinical Trials: What’s the Right Choice for Your Study? (Keith Marsolo, PhD)

Speaker

Keith Marsolo, PhD
Department of Population Health Sciences
Duke Clinical Research Institute
Duke University School of Medicine

Topic

Approaches to Patient Follow-Up for Clinical Trials: What’s the Right Choice for Your Study?

Keywords

Pragmatic clinical trial; Real-world data; Distributed research network; Electronic health records; EHR; Health data sources; Data standardization; Common data model; Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (FHIR); Application programming interface (API)

Key Points

  • Different sites have different capabilities and levels of sophistication around data. Clinical trial investigators should think from the beginning about the questions they want to answer and how much data is needed.
  • From different sources, such as the EHR, claims, or participant, data can be procured and provided in different ways, either by the patient, staff or clinician, or through IT and data experts.
  • PCTs with many sites may require a “patchwork quilt” of approaches for patient follow-up depending on the needs of the trial. Clinician-generated reports, direct from patients, and solutions involving application programming interfaces (APIs) are all good options for data exchange.

Discussion Themes

How do we think through the options for getting patient data where some sites may not be in the distributed research network or use a common data model?

Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (FHIR) is a draft standard describing data formats and elements and an application programming interface (API) for exchanging electronic health records. The FHIR interface requests data as an object, and for each defined domain it specifies allowable values and variables and predefines the information that you get out of the system.

Until data are collected/generated using the same standards/formats as the API, there will still be a need to understand the EHR-to-interface mapping.

For more information on using health data in embedded pragmatic clinical trials, visit the NIH Collaboratory’s EHR Core webpage.

Tags

#CommonDataModel, #RealWorldData, #FHIR, #pctGR, @Collaboratory1

February 21, 2019: Living Textbook Offers New Content on Design and Analysis of Pragmatic Clinical Trials

Members of the NIH Collaboratory’s Biostatistics and Study Design Core contributed 3 new sections to the Living Textbook exploring issues in the design and analysis of pragmatic clinical trials. The new sections offer insights into emerging issues in embedded pragmatic clinical trials and lessons learned from the NIH Collaboratory’s first round of Demonstration Projects.

  • The Designing to Avoid Identification Bias section addresses a type of selection bias that can occur in pragmatic clinical trials that use information from electronic health records to determine study population eligibility and in which the study intervention influences who undergoes screening or receives a diagnosis in clinical care.
  • The Alternative Cluster Randomized Designs section describes alternative design choices for cluster randomized trials and their implications for statistical power and sample size calculations. Modified cluster randomized designs, such as cluster randomization with crossover, may reduce the sample size required for a pragmatic clinical trial and may be particularly feasible in trials embedded in healthcare systems with electronic health records.
  • Case Study: STOP CRC Trial explores challenges in design and analysis that were faced in the Strategies and Opportunities to Stop Colorectal Cancer in Priority Populations (STOP CRC) trial, one of the NIH Collaboratory Demonstration Projects. The case study illustrates how the study team dealt with pragmatic issues during the planning and conduct of the trial.

In addition to contributing content to the Living Textbook, the Biostatistics and Study Design Core works with the NIH Collaboratory Demonstration Projects to address challenges in their statistical plans and study designs during the planning phase and to develop guidance and technical documents related to study design and biostatistical issues relevant to pragmatic clinical trials.

February 15, 2019: Improving Qualification of Investigators: Recommendations from the Clinical Trials Transformation Initiative (Christine M. Hildebrand, PA-C, Janette Panhuis)

Speakers

Christine M. Hildebrand, PA-C
Physician Assistant
Sub-Investigator
Clinical Operations Lead
Amici Clinical Research

Janette Panhuis
Chief Operating Officer
Population Health Research Institute
David Braley Research Institute

Topic

Improving Qualification of Investigators: Recommendations from the Clinical Trials Transformation Initiative

Keywords

CTTI; Investigator qualifications; Investigator training; Site team training; Good clinical practice; Clinical trials

Key Points

  • There is little evidence that good clinical practice (GCP) training alone sufficiently qualifies investigators in the conduct of clinical trials. What is needed is a targeted and risk-based approach to educating clinical trial investigators and their delegates in GCP principles.
  • A culture shift is needed that eliminates the distinction between “qualification” and “preparation” and moves toward investigators and their delegates assuming greater ownership of training and documenting evidence of their qualification.
  • CTTI recommendations outline how to confirm that site teams are qualified while also reducing inefficiencies in training and increasing preparation for successful study execution.

Discussion Themes

Investigators and site teams come to the table with different levels of research experience, training, and credentials. How can we effectively address gaps in skills and knowledge of GCP principles?

With respect to pragmatic trials conducted within healthcare systems, are there approaches to site monitoring that address issues related to turnover of PIs and clinical and research staff?

Greater ownership of GCP training and qualification by investigators and delegates can lead to active remediation of deficiencies at the clinical site.

CTTI recommendations are meant to be adaptable to the protocol, even when conducted in a real-world clinical setting using electronic health records.

For recommendations and tools for improving investigator qualification, visit CTTI’s Investigator Qualification website.

Tags

#ClinicalTrials, #GCPtraining, #pctGR, @Collaboratory1 @CTTI_Trials

February 1, 2019: Promoting Effective Advance Care Planning Communication in the Elderly: The ACP-PEACE Trial (James Tulsky, MD, Angelo Volandes, MD, MPH)

Speakers

James Tulsky, MD
Chair, Department of Psychosocial Oncology and Palliative Care
Dana-Farber Cancer Institute
Professor of Medicine, Harvard Medical School
Chief, Division of Palliative Medicine
Brigham and Women’s Hospital

Angelo Volandes, MD, MPH
Associate Professor of Medicine
Massachusetts General Hospital
Harvard Medical School

Topic

Promoting Effective Advance Care Planning Communication in the Elderly: The ACP-PEACE Trial

Keywords

Pragmatic clinical trial; Advance care planning; ACP PEACE; Dana-Farber Cancer Institute; National Institute on Aging; Palliative care; Video declarations; Goal-concordant care; Patient preferences

Key Points

  • Many people with serious illness die without receiving goal-concordant care, and patients over the age of 65 with cancer experience this disproportionately. Helping patients engage in advance care planning (ACP) can empower them to express and record their goals so that their care can be aligned with their preferences.
  • The ACP PEACE Demonstration Project is a pragmatic, stepped-wedge, randomized trial of a comprehensive ACP program in oncology clinics at 3 health systems. It will involve a combination of 2 evidence-based programs:
    • VitalTalk teaches clinicians important communication skills in having empathic conversations with seriously ill patients.
    • ACP Decisions uses videos to promote planning and decision-making by patients and families.
  • The ACP PEACE study will monitor long-term outcomes to evaluate whether patients received the care they planned for and wanted.

Discussion Themes

The last element of the ACP PEACE trial is a video declaration (ViDec), recorded by a subset of patients. In recording the ViDec, patients are prompted by questions assessing their confidence with their decision, satisfaction, decisional regret, and patient-provider experience.

The ACP PEACE study team has a scaling strategy in place if the intervention proves effective. Implementing the intervention as standard of care will involve a culture shift from what is currently expected in health systems.

Read more about the ACP PEACE Demonstration Project in the Living Textbook.

Tags

#AdvanceCarePlanning, #pctGR, @Collaboratory1 @VitalTalk, @ACPDecisions