The need for increased pragmatism in cardiovascular clinical trials

Evaluating registry-based trial economics: Results from the STRESS clinical trial

Background

Registry-based trials have the potential to reduce randomized clinical trial (RCT) costs. However, observed cost differences also may be achieved through pragmatic trial designs. A systematic comparison of trial costs across different designs has not been previously performed.

Methods

We conducted a study to compare the current Steroids to Reduce Systemic inflammation after infant heart surgery (STRESS) registry-based RCT vs. two established designs: pragmatic RCT and explanatory RCT. The primary outcome was total RCT design costs. Secondary outcomes included: RCT duration and personnel hours. Costs were estimated using the Duke Clinical Research Institute's pricing model.

Results

The Registry-Based RCT estimated duration was 31.9 weeks greater than the other designs (259.5 vs. 227.6 weeks). This delay was caused by the Registry-Based design's periodic data harvesting that delayed site closing and statistical reporting. Total personnel hours were greatest for the Explanatory design followed by the Pragmatic design and the Registry-Based design (52,488 vs 29,763 vs. 24,480 h, respectively). Total costs were greatest for the Explanatory design followed by the Pragmatic design and the Registry-Based design ($10,140,263 vs. $4,164,863 vs. $3,268,504, respectively). Thus, Registry-Based total costs were 32 % of the Explanatory and 78 % of the Pragmatic design.

Conclusion

Total costs for the STRESS RCT with a registry-based design were less than those for a pragmatic design and much less than an explanatory design. Cost savings reflect design elements and leveraging of registry resources to improve cost efficiency, but delays to trial completion should be considered.

Evaluation of in vitro dissolution profiles of modified-release metoprolol succinate tablets crushed using mortar and pestle technique

PURPOSE

Clinical practice guidelines advise against crushing modified-release dosage forms. Metoprolol succinate modified-release (MS-MR) tablets are commonly crushed in clinical practice to facilitate administration to patients with swallowing difficulties or using feeding tubes. To date, the effect of this practice remains unexplored. The in vitro effects of crushing commercially available MS-MR tablets were explored using a holistic approach.

METHODS

Dissolution profiles of crushed versus whole MS-MR tablets were compared. Tablets were crushed to powder state using pragmatic method mimicking hospital practices. For standardization purposes, the same operator, duration (60 seconds), hand, and mortar-pestle apparatus were used. Dissolution studies were conducted per U.S. Pharmacopeia at pH 1.2, pH 4.5, and pH 6.8 with USP apparatus 2 (paddle) at rotation speed of 50 rpm at 37±0.5 °C in 500 mL dissolution media. Samples were withdrawn at predetermined time points. Percent drug dissolved was measured by validated UV-vis Spectrophotometry. Comprehensive analysis of the dissolution data was conducted using model-independent, model-dependent, and ANOVA-based approaches (SPSS v.23 at α=0.05). Similarity (f2) and difference (f1) factors were calculated to compare the dissolution profiles between crushed (CT) and whole tablets (WT). Goodness of fit (GOF) analysis examined the compliance between in vitro dissolution behaviors and several drug release models. Model selection was based on GOF plots, Akaike criteria and adjusted coefficient of determination (R2adj). Imaging and particle size distribution analysis were conducted to examine associated surface and morphologic changes.

RESULTS

The dissolution profiles were not similar at pH 4.5 (f2=45.43, f1=18.97) and pH 6.8 (f2=31.47, f1=32.94). CT best fitted with Higuchi (pH 1.2: R2adj=0.9990), Weibull (pH 4.5: R2adj=0.9884), and Korsmeyer-Peppas (pH 6.8: R2adj=0.9719). Contrastingly, WT best fitted with Hopfenberg (pH 1.2: R2adj=0.9986), logistic (pH 4.5: R2adj=0.9839) and first-order (pH 6.8: R2adj=0.9979) models. A significant difference in the dissolution profiles was found between CT and WT using multivariate analysis of variance per time points and between the tablet forms (p=0.004). This was confirmed by unparalleled dissolution profiles. Crushing resulted in variations in particle size and surface morphological changes to the micropellets.

CONCLUSION

Crushing practices change the dissolution profile of MS-MR tablets by deforming the surface morphology of embedded micropellets. Amounts of drug dissolved between CT and WT were not the same at the compared time points across gastrointestinal pH ranges. This suggests potential clinical impact on plasma-concentration profiles of critically ill patients using feeding tube.

Rationale and design of the THIRST Alert feasibility study: a pragmatic, single-centre, parallel-group randomised controlled trial of an interruptive alert for oral fluid restriction in patients treated with intravenous furosemide

INTRODUCTION

Acute heart failure (HF) is a major cause of unplanned hospitalisation characterised by excess body water. A restriction in oral fluid intake is commonly imposed on patients as an adjunct to pharmacological therapy with loop diuretics, but there is a lack of evidence from traditional randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to support the safety and effectiveness of this intervention in the acute setting.This study aims to explore the feasibility of using computer alerts within the electronic health record (EHR) system to invite clinical care teams to enrol patients into a pragmatic RCT at the time of clinical decision-making. It will additionally assess the effectiveness of using an alert to help address the clinical research question of whether oral fluid restriction is a safe and effective adjunct to pharmacological therapy for patients admitted with fluid overload.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

THIRST (Randomised Controlled Trial within the electronic Health record of an Interruptive alert displaying a fluid Restriction Suggestion in patients with the treatable Trait of congestion) Alert is a single-centre, parallel-group, open-label pragmatic RCT embedded in the EHR system that will be conducted as a feasibility study at an National Health Service (NHS) hospital in London. The clinical care team will be invited to enrol suitable patients in the study using a point-of-care alert with a target sample size of 50 patients. Enrolled patients will then be randomised to either restricted or unrestricted oral fluid intake. Two primary outcomes will be explored (1) the proportion of eligible patients enrolled in the study and (2) the mean difference in oral fluid intake between randomised groups. A series of secondary outcomes are specified to evaluate the effectiveness of the alert, adherence to the randomised treatment allocation and the quality of data generated from routine care, relevant to the outcomes of interest.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study was approved by Riverside Research Ethics Committee (Ref: 22/LO/0889) and will be published on completion.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05869656.

Endpoint adjudication in cardiovascular clinical trials

Endpoint adjudication (EA) is a common feature of contemporary randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in cardiovascular medicine. Endpoint adjudication refers to a process wherein a group of expert reviewers, known as the clinical endpoint committee (CEC), verify potential endpoints identified by site investigators. Events that are determined by the CEC to meet pre-specified trial definitions are then utilized for analysis. The rationale behind the use of EA is that it may lessen the potential misclassification of clinical events, thereby reducing statistical noise and bias. However, it has been questioned whether this is universally true, especially given that EA significantly increases the time, effort, and resources required to conduct a trial. Herein, we compare the summary estimates obtained using adjudicated vs. non-adjudicated site designated endpoints in major cardiovascular RCTs in which both were reported. Based on these data, we lay out a framework to determine which trials may warrant EA and where it may be redundant. The value of EA is likely greater when cardiovascular trials have nuanced primary endpoints, endpoint definitions that align poorly with practice, sub-optimal data completeness, greater operator variability, and lack of blinding. EA may not be needed if the primary endpoint is all-cause death or all-cause hospitalization. In contrast, EA is likely merited for more nuanced endpoints such as myocardial infarction, bleeding, worsening heart failure as an outpatient, unstable angina, or transient ischaemic attack. A risk-based approach to adjudication can potentially allow compromise between costs and accuracy. This would involve adjudication of a small proportion of events, with further adjudication done if inconsistencies are detected.

Design, implementation, and inferential issues associated with clinical trials that rely on data in electronic medical records: a narrative review

Real world evidence is now accepted by authorities charged with assessing the benefits and harms of new therapies. Clinical trials based on real world evidence are much less expensive than randomized clinical trials that do not rely on "real world evidence" such as contained in electronic health records (EHR). Consequently, we can expect an increase in the number of reports of these types of trials, which we identify here as 'EHR-sourced trials.' 'In this selected literature review, we discuss the various designs and the ethical issues they raise. EHR-sourced trials have the potential to improve/increase common data elements and other aspects of the EHR and related systems. Caution is advised, however, in drawing causal inferences about the relationships among EHR variables. Nevertheless, we anticipate that EHR-CTs will play a central role in answering research and regulatory questions.

Digital Tool-Assisted Hospitalization Detection in the Tailored Antiplatelet Initiation to Lessen Outcomes due to Decreased Clopidogrel Response After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Study Compared to Traditional Site-Coordinator Ascertainment: Intervention Study

BACKGROUND

Accurate, timely ascertainment of clinical end points, particularly hospitalizations, is crucial for clinical trials. The Tailored Antiplatelet Initiation to Lessen Outcomes Due to Decreased Clopidogrel Response after Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (TAILOR-PCI) Digital Study extended the main TAILOR-PCI trial's follow-up to 2 years, using a smartphone-based research app featuring geofencing-triggered surveys and routine monthly mobile phone surveys to detect cardiovascular (CV) hospitalizations. This pilot study compared these digital tools to conventional site-coordinator ascertainment of CV hospitalizations.

OBJECTIVE

The objectives were to evaluate geofencing-triggered notifications and routine monthly mobile phone surveys' performance in detecting CV hospitalizations compared to telephone visits and health record reviews by study coordinators at each site.

METHODS

US and Canadian participants from the TAILOR-PCI Digital Follow-Up Study were invited to download the Eureka Research Platform mobile app, opting in for location tracking using geofencing, triggering a smartphone-based survey if near a hospital for ≥4 hours. Participants were sent monthly notifications for CV hospitalization surveys.

RESULTS

From 85 participants who consented to the Digital Study, downloaded the mobile app, and had not previously completed their final follow-up visit, 73 (85.8%) initially opted in and consented to geofencing. There were 9 CV hospitalizations ascertained by study coordinators among 5 patients, whereas 8 out of 9 (88.9%) were detected by routine monthly hospitalization surveys. One CV hospitalization went undetected by the survey as it occurred within two weeks of the previous event, and the survey only allowed reporting of a single hospitalization. Among these, 3 were also detected by the geofencing algorithm, but 6 out of 9 (66.7%) were missed by geofencing: 1 occurred in a participant who never consented to geofencing, while 5 hospitalizations occurred among participants who had subsequently turned off geofencing prior to their hospitalization. Geofencing-detected hospitalizations were ascertained within a median of 2 (IQR 1-3) days, monthly surveys within 11 (IQR 6.5-25) days, and site coordinator methods within 38 (IQR 9-105) days. The geofencing algorithm triggered 245 notifications among 39 participants, with 128 (52.2%) from true hospital presence and 117 (47.8%) from nonhospital health care facility visits. Additional geofencing iterative improvements to reduce hospital misidentification were made to the algorithm at months 7 and 12, elevating the rate of true alerts from 35.4% (55 true alerts/155 total alerts before month 7) to 78.7% (59 true alerts/75 total alerts in months 7-12) and ultimately to 93.3% (14 true alerts/5 total alerts in months 13-21), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The monthly digital survey detected most CV hospitalizations, while the geofencing survey enabled earlier detection but did not offer incremental value beyond traditional tools. Digital tools could potentially reduce the burden on study coordinators in ascertaining CV hospitalizations. The advantages of timely reporting via geofencing should be weighed against the issue of false notifications, which can be mitigated through algorithmic refinements.

Bridging Treatment Implementation Gaps in Patients With Heart Failure: JACC Focus Seminar 2/3

Heart failure (HF) is a leading cause of death and disability in older adults. Despite decades of high-quality evidence to support their use, guideline-directed medical therapies (GDMTs) that reduce death and disease burden in HF have been suboptimally implemented. Approaches to closing care gaps have focused largely on strategies proven to be ineffective, whilst effective interventions shown to improve GDMT uptake have not been instituted. This review synthesizes implementation interventions that increase the uptake of GDMT, discusses barriers and facilitators of implementation, summarizes conceptual frameworks in implementation science that could improve knowledge uptake, and offers suggestions for trial design that could better facilitate end-of-trial implementation. We propose an evidence-to-care conceptual model that could foster the simultaneous generation of evidence and long-term implementation. By adopting principles of implementation science, policymakers, researchers, and clinicians can help reduce the burden of HF on patients and health care systems worldwide.

Comparative analysis of level of evidence and class of recommendation for 50 clinical practice guidelines released by the European Society of Cardiology from 2011 to 2022

BACKGROUND

The European Society of Cardiology (ESC) clinical practice guidelines are essential tools for decision-making.

AIM

To analyze the level of evidence (LOE) and the class of recommendations in the ESC guidelines released in the last 12 years.

METHODS

We evaluated 50 ESC guidelines released from 2011 to 2022, related to 27 topics and categorized them into seven macro-groups. We analyzed every recommendation in terms of LOE and class of recommendation, calculating their relative proportions and changes over time in consecutive editions of the same guideline.

RESULTS

A total of 6972 recommendations were found, with an increase in number per year over time. Among the 50 ESC guidelines, the proportional distribution of classes of recommendations was 49% for Class I, 29% for Class IIa, 15% for Class IIb, and 8% for Class III. Overall, 16% of the recommendations were classified as LOE A, 31% LOE B and 53% LOE C. The field of preventive cardiology had the largest proportion of LOE A, while the lowest was in the field of valvular, myocardial, pericardial and pulmonary diseases. The overall proportion of LOE A recommendations in the most recent guidelines compared to their prior versions increased from 17% to 20%.

CONCLUSIONS

The recommendations included in the ESC guidelines widely differ in terms of quality of evidence, with only 16% supported by the highest quality of evidence. Although a slight global increase in LOE A recommendations was observed in recent years, further scientific research efforts are needed to increase the quality of evidence.

Meta-research on pragmatism of randomized trials: rationale and design of the PragMeta database

BACKGROUND

Pragmatic trials provide decision-oriented, real-world evidence that is highly applicable and generalizable. The interest in real-world evidence is fueled by the assumption that effects in the "real-world" are different to effects obtained under artificial, controlled, research conditions as often used for traditional explanatory trials. However, it is unknown which features of pragmatism, generalizability, and applicability would be responsible for such differences. There is a need to provide empirical evidence and promote meta-research to answer these fundamental questions on the pragmatism of randomized trials and real-world evidence. Here, we describe the rationale and design of the PragMeta database which pursues this goal ( www.PragMeta.org ).

METHODS

PragMeta is a non-commercial, open data platform and infrastructure to facilitate research on pragmatic trials. It collects and shares data from published randomized trials that either have a specific design feature or other characteristic related to pragmatism or they form clusters of trials addressing the same research question but having different aspects of pragmatism. This lays the foundation to determine the relationship of various features of pragmatism, generalizability, and applicability with intervention effects or other trial characteristics. The database contains trial data actively collected for PragMeta but also allows to import and link existing datasets of trials collected for other purposes, forming a large-scale meta-database. PragMeta captures data on (1) trial and design characteristics (e.g., sample size, population, intervention/comparison, outcome, longitudinal structure, blinding), (2) effects estimates, and (3) various determinants of pragmatism (e.g., the use of routinely collected data) and ratings from established tools used to determine pragmatism (e.g., the PRagmatic-Explanatory Continuum Indicator Summary 2; PRECIS-2). PragMeta is continuously provided online, inviting the meta-research community to collaborate, contribute, and/or use the database. As of April 2023, PragMeta contains data from > 700 trials, mostly with assessments on pragmatism.

CONCLUSIONS

PragMeta will inform a better understanding of pragmatism and the generation and interpretation of real-world evidence.

Concordance between clinical outcomes in the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial and in the electronic health record

BACKGROUND

Randomized trials are the gold standard for generating clinical practice evidence, but follow-up and outcome ascertainment are resource-intensive. Electronic health record (EHR) data from routine care can be a cost-effective means of follow-up, but concordance with trial-ascertained outcomes is less well-studied.

METHODS

We linked EHR and trial data for participants of the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT), a randomized trial comparing intensive and standard blood pressure targets. Among participants with available EHR data concurrent to trial-ascertained outcomes, we calculated sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value for EHR-recorded cardiovascular disease (CVD) events, using the gold standard of SPRINT-adjudicated outcomes (myocardial infarction (MI)/acute coronary syndrome (ACS), heart failure, stroke, and composite CVD events). We additionally compared the incidence of non-CVD adverse events (hyponatremia, hypernatremia, hypokalemia, hyperkalemia, bradycardia, and hypotension) in trial versus EHR data.

RESULTS

2468 SPRINT participants were included (mean age 68 (SD 9) years; 26% female). EHR data demonstrated ≥80% sensitivity and specificity, and ≥ 99% negative predictive value for MI/ACS, heart failure, stroke, and composite CVD events. Positive predictive value ranged from 26% (95% CI; 16%, 38%) for heart failure to 52% (95% CI; 37%, 67%) for MI/ACS. EHR data uniformly identified more non-CVD adverse events and higher incidence rates compared with trial ascertainment.

CONCLUSIONS

These results support a role for EHR data collection in clinical trials, particularly for capturing laboratory-based adverse events. EHR data may be an efficient source for CVD outcome ascertainment, though there is clear benefit from adjudication to avoid false positives.

MetAAA trial patients show superior quality of life compared to patients under regular surveillance for small AAA: a single-center retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is a multifactorial vascular disease associated with high morbidity and mortality. Currently, surgical intervention is the only treatment option, and there is no drug therapy available for AAA. Hence, surveillance of AAA until indication for surgery may impact patient quality of life (QoL). There is a paucity of high-quality observational data on health status and QoL, particularly among AAA patients participating in randomized controlled trials. The objective of this study was to compare the QoL scores of AAA patients on surveillance to those of AAA patients enrolled in the MetAAA trial.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Overall, 54 MetAAA trial patients and 23 AAA patients under regular surveillance for small AAA (part of a longitudinal monitoring study) were asked to complete three established and validated (in total 561 longitudinally collected) QoL questionnaires: the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36), the Aneurysm Symptom Rating Questionnaire (ASRQ), and the Aneurysm-Dependent Quality of Life questionnaire (ADQoL).

RESULTS

A superior health status and QoL was found in AAA patients participating in the MetAAA trial compared to AAA patients under regular surveillance. In detail, MetAAA trial patients showed superior general health perception ( P =0.012), higher energy level ( P =0.036) as well as enhanced emotional well-being ( P =0.044) and fewer limitations due to general malaise ( P =0.021), which was subsequently reflected in an overall superior current QoL score ( P =0.039) compared to AAA patients under regular surveillance.

CONCLUSION

AAA patients enrolled in the MetAAA trial showed superior health status and QoL compared to AAA patients under regular surveillance.

Public reporting of black participation in anti-hypertensive drug clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Non-Hispanic Black people in the United States have the highest prevalence of essential hypertension. Unfortunately, clinical trials often underrepresent Black patients. We aim to understand whether trial sponsorship type is associated with representation of Black participants in anti-hypertensive drug clinical trials. Then, we contextualize our findings amongst current efforts to improve diversity in clinical research populations.

METHODS

We searched ClinicalTrials.gov in May 2022 for antihypertensive drug trials. Of n = 408 trials in our initial search, n = 97 (23.77%) met inclusion criteria and were stratified by sponsorship type (industry vs non-industry). Standardized tests of difference were employed to compare characteristics of these trials, and linear regression was used to model change over time.

RESULTS

Of 97 trials reporting results from 2010 to 2020, there were minimal differences in the percent of Black patients enrolled in anti-hypertensive clinical trials by sponsorship type. Both industry and non-industry sponsored studies had high rates of non-reporting, with slightly more non-reporting for industry (73.2%) vs non-industry (66.67%) studies. Industry funded studies reported results to ClinicalTrials.gov within 23.3 ± 15.0 months from completing studies, while non-industry funded trials reported within 18.9 ± 10.8 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite Black Americans carrying the highest burden of disease for essential hypertension, they are underrepresented in anti-hypertension clinical trials and their overall participation has decreased between 2010 and 2020. In addition, there is major underreporting of trial participant race. We implore researchers and funders to establish clear, meaningful targets for anti-hypertensive drug trial diversity, and improve transparency in reporting of study characteristics.

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in Clinical Research: A Path Toward Precision Health for Everyone

Healthcare disparities are a persistent societal problem. One of the contributing factors to this status quo is the lack of diversity and representativeness of research efforts, which result in nongeneralizable evidence that, in turn, provides suboptimal means to enable the best possible outcomes at the individual level. There are several strategies that research teams can adopt to improve the diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) of their efforts; these strategies span the totality of the research path, from initial design to the shepherding of clinical data through a potential regulatory process. These strategies include more intentionality and DEI-based goal-setting, more diverse research and leadership teams, better community engagement to set study goals and approaches, better tailored outreach interventions, decentralization of study procedures and incorporation of innovative technology for more flexible data collection, and self-surveillance to identify and prevent biases. Within their remit of overlooking research efforts, regulatory authorities, as stakeholders, also have the potential for a positive effect on the DEI of emerging clinical evidence. All these are implementable tools and mechanisms that can make study participation more approachable to diverse communities, and ultimately generate evidence that is more generalizable and a conduit for better outcomes. The research community has an imperative to make DEI principles key foundational aspects in study conduct in order to pursue better personalized medicine for diverse patient populations.