Guiding the rational design of patient-centred drug trials in Cystic Fibrosis: A Delphi study

Levelling the playing field through the London Network of the UK clinical trials accelerator platform

Cystic fibrosis (CF) is a multisystem, genetic disease with a significantly reduced life expectancy. Despite substantial progress in therapies in the last 10-15 years, there is still no cure. There are dozens of drugs in the development pipeline and multiple clinical trials are being conducted across the globe. The UK Cystic Fibrosis Trust's (CFT) Clinical Trials Accelerator Platform (CTAP) is a national initiative bringing together 25 UK based CF centres to support the CF community in accessing and participating in CF clinical trials. CTAP enables more CF centres to run a broader portfolio of trials and increases the range of CF studies available for UK patients. There are four large specialist CF centres based in London, all within a small geographical region as well as two smaller centres which deliver CF care. At the launch of CTAP, these centres formed a sub-network in a consortium-style collaboration. The purpose of the network was to ensure equity of access to trials for patients across the UK's capital, and to share experience and knowledge. Four years into the programme we have reviewed our practices through working group meetings and an online survey. We sought to identify strengths and areas for improvement. We share our findings here, as we believe they are relevant to others delivering research in regions outside of London and in other chronic diseases.

How representative are clinical trial cohorts of the general CF population? Implications for trial planning

Understanding the number of patients eligible to participate in research is important to design protocols and define research priorities. We reviewed the records of all patients with CF, age 12+, who receive care at our centre. We assessed their eligibility for trial participation based on common trial inclusion/exclusion criteria. 643 patients were included in the analysis, 31 were modulator ineligible(MI). Only 198(31 %) of the total cohort and 7(23 %) of the MI cohort were eligible for participation based on the hypothetical criteria. The most common reason for ineligibility was ppFEV1 ≥90 % followed by clinical instability, complex comorbidity and anticipated inability to adhere to the protocol. We suggest this would be a useful exercise for centres planning to either participate in, or refer subjects into, upcoming trials to undertake for their own cohort. We also make suggestions for protocol designs that optimise the number of patients who are eligible to participate.

A discrete choice experiment to quantify the influence of trial features on the decision to participate in cystic fibrosis trials

BACKGROUND

Patient-centred trial design optimises recruitment and retention, reduces trial failure rates and increases the diversity of trial cohorts. This allows safe and effective treatments to reach clinic more quickly. To achieve this, patients' views must be incorporated into trial design.

METHODS

A discrete choice experiment was used to quantify preferences of pwCF for trials features; medicine type, trial location, stipend, washout, drug access on trial completion and trial design. Respondents were presented pairs of hypothetical trial scenarios with different level combinations assigned through experimental design. Respondents were asked to pick their preferred option or decline both. The cross-sectional data were explored using a Random Parameters Logit model.

RESULTS

We received 207 eligible responses between Oct2020-Jan2021. The strongest influence on the decision to participate was trial location; pwCF favour participation at their usual clinical centre. Greater travel distances made respondents less willing to participate. Post-trial drug access ranked second. pwCF would rather participate in modulator trials than trials of other drugs. In general, pwCF did not favour a washout period, but were more prepared to washout non-modulators than modulators. Stipend provision was not ranked highly, but higher stipends increased intention to participate. Trial design (placebo vs open-label) had minimal influence on the decision to participate. There are complex interactions between placebos and washouts.

CONCLUSIONS

We used quantitative methods to systematically elicit preferences of pwCF for clinical trials' features. We explore the relevance of our findings to trial design and delivery in the current CF trials landscape.

Future therapies for cystic fibrosis

We are currently witnessing transformative change for people with cystic fibrosis with the introduction of small molecule, mutation-specific drugs capable of restoring function of the defective protein, cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR). However, despite being a single gene disorder, there are multiple cystic fibrosis-causing genetic variants; mutation-specific drugs are not suitable for all genetic variants and also do not correct all the multisystem clinical manifestations of the disease. For many, there will remain a need for improved treatments. Those patients with gene variants responsive to CFTR modulators may have found these therapies to be transformational; research is now focusing on safely reducing the burden of symptom-directed treatment. However, modulators are not available in all parts of the globe, an issue which is further widening existing health inequalities. For patients who are not suitable for- or do not have access to- modulator drugs, alternative approaches are progressing through the trials pipeline. There will be challenges encountered in design and implementation of these trials, for which the established global CF infrastructure is a major advantage. Here, the Cystic Fibrosis National Research Strategy Group of the UK NIHR Respiratory Translational Research Collaboration looks to the future of cystic fibrosis therapies and consider priorities for future research and development.

Going the Extra Mile: Why Clinical Research in Cystic Fibrosis Must Include Children

This is an exciting time for research and novel drug development in cystic fibrosis. However, rarely has the adage, “Children are not just little adults” been more relevant. This article is divided into two main sections. In the first, we explore why it is important to involve children in research. We discuss the potential benefits of understanding a disease and its treatment in children, and we highlight that children have the same legal and ethical right to evidence-based therapy as adults. Additionally, we discuss why extrapolation from adults may be inappropriate, for example, medication pharmacokinetics may be different in children, and there may be unpredictable adverse effects. In the second part, we discuss how to involve children and their families in research. We outline the importance and the complexities of selecting appropriate outcome measures, and we discuss the role co-design may have in improving the involvement of children. We highlight the importance of appropriate staffing and resourcing, and we outline some of the common challenges and possible solutions, including practical tips on obtaining consent/assent in children and adolescents. We conclude that it is unethical to simply rely on extrapolation from adult studies because research in young children is challenging and that research should be seen as a normal part of the paediatric therapeutic journey.

A survey: Understanding the health and perspectives of people with CF not benefiting from CFTR modulators

BACKGROUND

While the advent of cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) modulator use has improved daily life and long-term prognosis of CF for many with approved CFTR mutations, approximately 10% of people with CF (pwCF) have only symptomatic treatments available.

METHODS

Between June 10 and July 1, 2021, Emily's Entourage distributed a 38-question anonymous survey targeted at pwCF not benefitting from approved modulators via social media and email to pwCF and CF advocacy groups in and outside the United States regarding health status, impact of CF, unmet needs, and clinical research interest.

RESULTS

There were 431 survey respondents representing pwCF on five continents. The majority of pwCF had moderate lung disease (50.3%). Ineligibility based on CFTR mutation (64.1%) was the most frequently reported reason pwCF were not on modulators. PwCF reported the most impacted aspects of life were mental (66.7%) and physical (40.7%) health. Financial concerns and feelings of isolation were commonly reported. Witnessing improvements for peers with access to modulators was both uplifting and disheartening. The majority of pwCF would be interested in participating in future clinical research (77.6%), although some living outside of the United States cited lack of opportunity to participate in clinical trials as a barrier.

CONCLUSIONS

PwCF who are ineligible, intolerant, or lack access to modulators have a high burden of disease impacting their physical and mental health. Although most are happy for those who are benefiting from modulators, they are eager for the opportunity to experience similar improvements for themselves, and willing to participate in clinical trials of new therapies.