Approach to High Volume Enrollment in Clinical Research: Experiences from an All of Us Research Program Site

Using patient portals for large-scale recruitment of individuals underrepresented in biomedical research: an evaluation of engagement patterns throughout the patient portal recruitment process at a single site within the All of Us Research Program

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the use of patient portal messaging to recruit individuals historically underrepresented in biomedical research (UBR) to the All of Us Research Program (AoURP) at a single recruitment site.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patient portal-based recruitment was implemented at Columbia University Irving Medical Center. Patient engagement was assessed using patient's electronic health record (EHR) at four recruitment stages: Consenting to be contacted, opening messages, responding to messages, and showing interest in participating. Demographic and socioeconomic data were also collected from patient's EHR and univariate logistic regression analyses were conducted to assess patient engagement.

RESULTS

Between October 2022 and November 2023, a total of 59 592 patients received patient portal messages inviting them to join the AoURP. Among them, 24 445 (41.0%) opened the message, 8983 (15.1%) responded, and 3765 (6.3%) showed interest in joining the program. Though we were unable to link enrollment data with EHR data, we estimate about 2% of patients contacted ultimately enrolled in the AoURP. Patients from underrepresented race and ethnicity communities had lower odds of consenting to be contacted and opening messages, but higher odds of showing interest after responding.

DISCUSSION

Patient portal messaging provided both patients and recruitment staff with a more efficient approach to outreach, but patterns of engagement varied across UBR groups.

CONCLUSION

Patient portal-based recruitment enables researchers to contact a substantial number of participants from diverse communities. However, more effort is needed to improve engagement from underrepresented racial and ethnic groups at the early stages of the recruitment process.

Discontinuation and nonpublication of clinical trials in orthopaedic oncology

BACKGROUND

Despite the pivotal role of clinical trials in advancing orthopaedic oncology knowledge and treatment strategies, the persistent issues of trial discontinuation and nonpublication are significant problems. This study conducted an analysis examining clinical trial discontinuation rates, associations between intervention types and discontinuation/nonpublication, and the role of funding, enrollment size, and their implications for trial success and completion.

METHODS

This study, conducted on May 1, 2023, utilized a cross-sectional design to comprehensively analyze phase 3 and 4 randomized controlled trials within the realm of orthopaedic oncology. We specifically incorporated Phase 3 and 4 trials as they are designed to evaluate prolonged outcomes in human subjects and are more likely to reach publication. Study characteristics of interest included the intervention utilized in the clinical trial, presence of funding, whether the trial was published, completed, and trial enrollment size. The investigation involved an examination of ClinicalTrials.gov, a prominent online repository of clinical trial data managed by the National Library of Medicine of the USA. Descriptive statistics and multivariate logistic regressions were used to determine statistical significance.

RESULTS

Among the cohort of 130 trials, 19.2% were prematurely discontinued. Completion rates varied based on intervention type; 111 pharmaceutical trials demonstrated a completion rate of 83.8%, whereas 19 non-pharmaceutical trials exhibited a completion rate of 8.0% (P < .001). Surgical trials, totaling 10, showed a completion rate of 90%. The overall trial publication rate was 86.15%, with pharmaceutical interventions achieving a publication rate of 91.96%. Larger-scale trials (≥ 261 participants) emerged as a protective factor against both discontinuation (Adjusted Odds Ratio [AOR]: 0.85, 95% Confidence Interval [CI] 0.42-0.95) and nonpublication (AOR: 0.19, 95% CI 0.13-.47), compared to smaller-scale trials.

CONCLUSION

This study accentuates the heightened vulnerability of non-pharmaceutical interventions and trials exhibiting lower rates of enrollment to the issues of discontinuation and nonpublication. Moving forward, the advancement of clinical trials necessitates a concerted effort to enhance trial methodologies, especially concerning nonpharmaceutical interventions, along with a meticulous refinement of participant enrollment criteria.

Creation of standardized tools to evaluate reporting in health research: Population Reporting Of Gender, Race, Ethnicity & Sex (PROGRES)

Despite increasing diversity in research recruitment, research finding reporting by gender, race, ethnicity, and sex has remained up to the discretion of authors. This study developped and piloted tools to standardize the inclusive reporting of gender, race, ethnicity, and sex in health research. A modified Delphi approach was used to develop standardized tools for the inclusive reporting of gender, race, ethnicity, and sex in health research. Health research, social epidemiology, sociology, and medical anthropology experts from 11 different universities participated in the Delphi process. The tools were pilot tested on 85 health research manuscripts in top health research journals to determine inter-rater reliability of the tools. The tools each spanned five dimensions for both sex and gender as well as race and ethnicity: Author inclusiveness, Participant inclusiveness, Nomenclature reporting, Descriptive reporting, and Outcomes reporting for each subpopulation. The sex and gender tool had a median score of 6 and a range of 1-15 out of 16 possible points. The percent agreement between reviewers piloting the sex and gender tool was 82%. The interrater reliability or average Cohen's Kappa was 0.54 with a standard deviation of 0.33 demonstrating moderate agreement. The race and ethnicity tool had a median score of 1 and a range of 0-15 out of 16 possible points. Race and ethnicity were both reported in only 25.8% of studies evaluated. Most studies that reported race reported only the largest subgroups; White, Black, and Latinx. The percent agreement between reviewers piloting the race and ethnicity tool was 84 and average Cohen's Kappa was 0.61 with a standard deviation of 0.38 demonstrating substantial agreement. While the overall dimension scores were low (indicating low inclusivity), the interrater reliability measures indicated moderate to substantial agreement for the respective tools. Efforts in recruitment alone will not provide more inclusive literature without improving reporting.

Achieving a Representative Sample of Asian Americans in Biomedical Research Through Community-Based Approaches: Comparing Demographic Data in the All of Us Research Program With the American Community Survey

BACKGROUND

Underrepresented persons are often not included in biomedical research. It is unknown if the general Asian American population is being represented in All of Us. The purpose of this study was to compare the Asian demographic data in the All of Us cohort with the Asian nationally representative data from the American Community Survey.

METHOD

Demographic characteristics and health literacy of Asians in All of Us were examined. Findings were qualitatively compared with the Asian data in the 2019 American Community Survey 1-year estimate.

RESULTS

Compared with the national composition of Asians, less All of Us participants were born outside the United States (64% vs 79%), were younger, and had higher levels of education (76% vs 52%). Over 60% of All of Us participants reported high levels of health literacy.

CONCLUSION

This study had implications for the development of strategies that ensure diverse populations are represented in biomedical research.

Outreach, Screening, and Randomization of APOE ε4 Carriers into an Alzheimer's Prevention Trial: A global Perspective from the API Generation Program

BACKGROUND

Alzheimer's disease (AD) prevention trials require a large outreach and screening funnel to identify cognitively unimpaired adults who meet the study's inclusion criteria, such as certain clinical or demographic criteria, genetic risk factors, and/or biomarker evidence of the disease.

OBJECTIVES

Describe tactics and strategies to identify and enroll cognitively unimpaired adults with one (heterozygotes [HT]) or two (homozygotes [HM]) copies of the APOE ε4 allele, a genetic risk factor for dementia due to AD, into the Alzheimer's Prevention Initiative (API) Generation Program, the largest and only prevention trials for late onset AD using this enrichment technique.

DESIGN AND SETTING

The Generation Program was comprised of two global, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel group adaptive design with variable treatment duration clinical trials. Generation Study 1 randomized participants into one of two cohorts: Cohort 1 which evaluated CAD106 vs. placebo or Cohort 2 which evaluated umibecestat vs placebo. Generation Study 2 randomized participants into two doses of umibecestat vs. placebo. The Generation Program was terminated early in 2019, while enrollment was still occurring.

PARTICIPANTS

Both Generation Study 1 and Generation Study 2 enrolled cognitively unimpaired APOE ε4 HMs aged 60-75; Generation Study 2 also enrolled APOE ε4 HTs ages 60-75 with elevated brain amyloid.

METHODS AND MEASUREMENTS

Describe results of the centralized and localized outreach, recruitment, screening strategies and tactics as well as characteristics of sites successful at enrolling genetically eligible participants, with a particular focus on APOE ε4 HMs given the 2-3% prevalence of this genotype.

RESULTS

At the time the trial program was terminated, 35,333 individuals had consented to the optional prescreening ICF1a/ICFA and provided a sample of DNA for APOE genotyping, 1,138 APOE ε4 HMs consented to screening for Generation Study 1 (ICF1b), and 1,626 APOE ε4 carriers were randomized into either Generation Study 1 or Generation Study 2. Genetic testing registries, partnerships with genetic testing/counseling companies, and the optional prescreening ICF1a/ICFA were the most successful strategies for identifying genetically eligible participants for screening.

CONCLUSIONS

It is feasible to recruit, screen and randomize cognitively unimpaired APOE ε4 carriers, particularly APOE ε4 HMs for a global AD prevention trial. The Generation Program was on track to complete enrollment by end of 2019. Factors that were key to this success included: working with sites to develop customizable outreach, recruitment, and screening programs specific to their site needs, providing forums for sites to exchange best practices, and developing partnerships between the sponsor team and trial sites.

Enhancing Recruitment and Retention of Minority Populations for Clinical Research in Pulmonary, Critical Care, and Sleep Medicine: An Official American Thoracic Society Research Statement

Background: Well-designed clinical research needs to obtain information that is applicable to the general population. However, most current studies fail to include substantial cohorts of racial/ethnic minority populations. Such underrepresentation may lead to delayed diagnosis or misdiagnosis of disease, wide application of approved interventions without appropriate knowledge of their usefulness in certain populations, and development of recommendations that are not broadly applicable.Goals: To develop best practices for recruitment and retention of racial/ethnic minorities for clinical research in pulmonary, critical care, and sleep medicine.Methods: The American Thoracic Society convened a workshop in May of 2019. This included an international interprofessional group from academia, industry, the NIH, and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, with expertise ranging from clinical and biomedical research to community-based participatory research methods and patient advocacy. Workshop participants addressed historical and current mistrust of scientific research, systemic bias, and social and structural barriers to minority participation in clinical research. A literature search of PubMed and Google Scholar was performed to support conclusions. The search was not a systematic review of the literature.Results: Barriers at the individual, interpersonal, institutional, and federal/policy levels were identified as limiting to minority participation in clinical research. Through the use of a multilevel framework, workshop participants proposed evidence-based solutions to the identified barriers.Conclusions: To date, minority participation in clinical research is not representative of the U.S. and global populations. This American Thoracic Society research statement identifies potential evidence-based solutions by applying a multilevel framework that is anchored in community engagement methods and patient advocacy.

Leveraging population-based exome screening to impact clinical care: The evolution of variant assessment in the Geisinger MyCode research project

Exome and genome sequencing are increasingly utilized in research studies and clinical care and can provide clinically relevant information beyond the initial intent for sequencing, including medically actionable secondary findings. Despite ongoing debate about sharing this information with patients and participants, a growing number of clinical laboratories and research programs routinely report secondary findings that increase the risk for selected diseases. Recently, there has been a push to maximize the potential benefit of this practice by implementing proactive genomic screening at the population level irrespective of medical history, but the feasibility of deploying population-scale proactive genomic screening requires scaling key elements of the genomic data evaluation process. Herein, we describe the motivation, development, and implementation of a population-scale variant-first screening pipeline combining bioinformatics-based filtering with a manual review process to screen for clinically relevant findings in research exomes generated through the DiscovEHR collaboration within Geisinger's MyCode® research project. Consistent with other studies, this pipeline yields a screen-positive detection rate between 2.1 and 2.6% (depending on inclusion of those with prior indication-based testing) in 130,048 adult MyCode patient-participants screened for clinically relevant findings in 60 genes. Our variant-first pipeline affords cost and time savings by filtering out negative cases, thereby avoiding analysis of each exome one-by-one, as typically employed in the diagnostic setting. While research is still needed to fully appreciate the benefits of population genomic screening, MyCode provides the first demonstration of a program at scale to help shape how population genomic screening is integrated into routine clinical care.

Outreach to new mothers through direct mail and email: recruitment in the Early Check research study

Abstract

Meeting recruitment targets for clinical trials and health research studies is a notable challenge. Unsuccessful efforts to recruit participants from traditionally underserved populations can limit who benefits from scientific discovery, thus perpetuating inequities in health outcomes and access to care. In this study, we evaluated direct mail and email outreach campaigns designed to recruit women who gave birth in North Carolina for a statewide research study offering expanded newborn screening for a panel of rare health conditions. Of the 54,887 women who gave birth in North Carolina from September 28, 2018, through March 19, 2019, and were eligible to be included on the study’s contact lists, we had access to a mailing address for 97.9% and an email address for 6.3%. Rural women were less likely to have sufficient contact information available, but this amounted to less than a one percentage point difference by urbanicity. Native American women were less likely to have an email address on record; however, we did not find a similar disparity when recruitment using direct‐mail letters and postcards was concerned. Although we sent letters and emails in roughly equal proportion by urbanicity and race/ethnicity, we found significant differences in enrollment across demographic subgroups. Controlling for race/ethnicity and urbanicity, we found that direct‐mail letters and emails were effective recruitment methods. The enrollment rate among women who were sent a recruitment letter was 4.1%, and this rate increased to 5.0% among women who were also sent an email invitation.