Avoiding Pitfalls With Implementation of Randomized Controlled Multicenter Trials: Strategies to Achieve Milestones

Tips and tricks for successfully conducting a multicenter study

Multicenter studies play a crucial role in medical research and advancement, facilitating the application of new knowledge to clinical practice. These studies are associated with multiple benefits but are more complex than those involving a single center. With the philosophy that most of the qualities required to lead a multicenter study depend on attitude and can be learned, developed, and improved, in this manuscript, we share with the reader a series of recommendations that we consider important for successfully conducting such studies. The tips and tricks that will be discussed in detail are as follows: effectively leading the project; clearly defining viable and relevant objectives; designing a clear and detailed protocol; carefully selecting centers and collaborating investigators; meticulously designing the case report form; centrally managing the project efficiently; maintaining fluent communication with investigators; and, finally, designing a clear authorship policy and ensuring the appropriate publication of the study results. We hope that these suggestions encourage potential researchers to conduct multicenter studies, thereby collectively enhancing the quality of research and its application to clinical practice.

Collaborative inference for treatment effect with distributed data-sharing management in multicenter studies

Data sharing barriers present paramount challenges arising from multicenter clinical studies where multiple data sources are stored and managed in a distributed fashion at different local study sites. Merging such data sources into a common data storage for a centralized statistical analysis requires a data use agreement, which is often time-consuming. Data merging may become more burdensome when propensity score modeling is involved in the analysis because combining many confounding variables, and systematic incorporation of this additional modeling in a meta-analysis has not been thoroughly investigated in the literature. Motivated from a multicenter clinical trial of basal insulin treatment for reducing the risk of post-transplantation diabetes mellitus, we propose a new inference framework that avoids the merging of subject-level raw data from multiple sites at a centralized facility but needs only the sharing of summary statistics. Unlike the architecture of federated learning, the proposed collaborative inference does not need a center site to combine local results and thus enjoys maximal protection of data privacy and minimal sensitivity to unbalanced data distributions across data sources. We show theoretically and numerically that the new distributed inference approach has little loss of statistical power compared to the centralized method that requires merging the entire data. We present large-sample properties and algorithms for the proposed method. We illustrate its performance by simulation experiments and the motivating example on the differential average treatment effect of basal insulin to lower risk of diabetes among kidney-transplant patients compared to the standard-of-care.

Opportunities and challenges in heart rhythm research: Rationale and development of an electrophysiology collaboratory

There are many challenges in the current landscape of electrophysiology (EP) clinical and translational research, including increasing costs and complexity, competing demands, regulatory requirements, and challenges with study implementation. This review seeks to broadly discuss the state of EP research, including challenges and opportunities. Included here are results from a Heart Rhythm Society (HRS) Research Committee member survey detailing HRS members' perspectives regarding both barriers to clinical and translational research and opportunities to address these challenges. We also provide stakeholder perspectives on barriers and opportunities for future EP research, including input from representatives of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, industry, and research funding institutions that participated in a Research Collaboratory Summit convened by HRS. This review further summarizes the experiences of the heart failure and heart valve communities and how they have approached similar challenges in their own fields. We then explore potential solutions, including various models of research ecosystems designed to identify research challenges and to coordinate ways to address them in a collaborative fashion in order to optimize innovation, increase efficiency of evidence generation, and advance the development of new therapeutic products. The objectives of the proposed collaborative cardiac EP research community are to encourage and support scientific discourse, research efficiency, and evidence generation by exploring collaborative and equitable solutions in which stakeholders within the EP community can interact to address knowledge gaps, innovate, and advance new therapies.

Challenges Associated with Managing a Multicenter Clinical Trial in Severe Burns

Managing multicenter clinical trials (MCTs) is demanding and complex. The Randomized controlled Evaluation of high-volume hemofiltration in adult burn patients with Septic shoCk and acUte kidnEy injury (RESCUE) trial was a prospective, MCT involving the impact of high-volume hemofiltration continuous renal replacement therapy on patients experiencing acute kidney injury and septic shock. Ten clinical burn centers from across the United States were recruited to enroll a target sample size of 120 subjects. This manuscripts reviews some of the obstacles and knowledge gained while coordinating the RESCUE trial. The first subject was enrolled in February 2012, 22 months after initial IRB approval and 29 months from the time the grant was awarded. The RESCUE team consisted of personnel at each site, including the lead site, a data coordination center, data safety monitoring board, steering committees, and the sponsor. Seven clinical sites had enrolled 37 subjects when enrollment stopped in February 2016. Obstacles included changes in institutional review boards, multiple layers of review, staffing changes, creation and amendment of study documents and procedures, and finalization of contracts. Successful completion of a MCT requires a highly functional research team with sufficient patient population, expertise, and research infrastructure. Additionally, realistic timelines must be established with strategies to overcome challenges. Inevitable obstacles should be discussed in the pretrial phase and continuous correspondence must be maintained with all relevant research parties throughout all phases of study.

Sustainability of Blood Pressure Reduction in Black Barbershops

BACKGROUND

We developed a new model of hypertension care for non-Hispanic black men that links health promotion by barbers to medication management by American Society of Hypertension-certified pharmacists and demonstrated efficacy in a 6-month cluster-randomized trial. The marked reduction in systolic blood pressure (BP) seen at 6 months warranted continuing the trial through 12 months to test sustainability, a necessary precondition for implementation research.

METHODS

We enrolled a cohort of 319 black male patrons with systolic BP ≥140 mm Hg at baseline. Fifty-two Los Angeles County barbershops were assigned to either a pharmacist-led intervention or an active control group. In the intervention group, barbers promoted follow-up with pharmacists who prescribed BP medication under a collaborative practice agreement with patrons' primary care providers. In the control group, barbers promoted follow-up with primary care providers and lifestyle modification. After BP assessment at 6 months, the intervention continued with fewer in-person pharmacist visits to test whether the intervention effect could be sustained safely for 1 year while reducing pharmacist travel time. Final BP and safety outcomes were assessed in both groups at 12 months.

RESULTS

At baseline, mean systolic BP was 152.4 mm Hg in the intervention group and 154.6 mm Hg in the control group. At 12 months, mean systolic BP fell by 28.6 mm Hg (to 123.8 mm Hg) in the intervention group and by 7.2 mm Hg (to 147.4 mm Hg) in the control group. The mean reduction was 20.8 mm Hg greater in the intervention (95% CI, 13.9-27.7; P<0.0001). A BP <130/80 mm Hg was achieved by 68.0% of the intervention group versus 11.0% of the control group ( P<0.02). These new 12-month efficacy data are statistically indistinguishable from our previously reported 6-month data. No treatment-related serious adverse events occurred in either group over 12 months. Cohort retention at 12 months was 90% in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Among black male barbershop patrons with uncontrolled hypertension, health promotion by barbers resulted in large and sustained BP reduction over 12 months when coupled with medication management by American Society of Hypertension-certified pharmacists. Broad-scale implementation research is both justified and warranted.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT 02321618.

Cluster-Randomized Trial to Evaluate a Centralized Clinical Pharmacy Service in Private Family Medicine Offices

BACKGROUND

The use of clinical pharmacists in primary care has improved the control of several chronic cardiovascular conditions. However, many private physician practices lack the resources to implement team-based care with pharmacists. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether a centralized, remote, clinical pharmacy service could improve guideline adherence and secondary measures of cardiovascular risk in primary care offices in rural and small communities.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This study was a prospective trial in 12 family medicine offices cluster randomized to either the intervention or usual care. The intervention was delivered for 12 months, and subjects had research visits at baseline and 12 months. The primary outcome was adherence to guidelines, and secondary outcomes included changes in key cardiovascular risk factors and preventative health measures. We enrolled 302 subjects. There was no improvement in the Guideline Advantage score from baseline to 12 months in the control group (64.7% versus 63.1%, respectively; P=0.21). There was a statistically significant improvement in the intervention group from 63.3% at baseline to 67.8% at 12 months (P=0.02). The estimated benefit of the intervention was 5.0%±2.4% (95% confidence interval=-0.5% to 10.4%; P=0.07). Several criteria were significantly better for intervention subjects, including appropriate statin therapy (P<0.001), body mass index, screening (P<0.001), and alcohol screening (P<0.001). Only 13.7% of subjects with diabetes mellitus had hemoglobin A1c at goal at baseline, and this increased to 30.8% and 21.0% in the intervention and control group, respectively, at 12 months (P=0.10).

CONCLUSIONS

The centralized, remote pharmacist intervention was successfully implemented. The improvements in outcomes were modest, in part because of higher than expected baseline guideline adherence. Future studies of this model should focus on patients with uncontrolled conditions at high risk for cardiovascular events.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT 01983813.

A Cluster-Randomized Trial of Blood-Pressure Reduction in Black Barbershops

BACKGROUND

Uncontrolled hypertension is a major problem among non-Hispanic black men, who are underrepresented in pharmacist intervention trials in traditional health care settings.

METHODS

We enrolled a cohort of 319 black male patrons with systolic blood pressure of 140 mm Hg or more from 52 black-owned barbershops (nontraditional health care setting) in a cluster-randomized trial in which barbershops were assigned to a pharmacist-led intervention (in which barbers encouraged meetings in barbershops with specialty-trained pharmacists who prescribed drug therapy under a collaborative practice agreement with the participants’ doctors) or to an active control approach (in which barbers encouraged lifestyle modification and doctor appointments). The primary outcome was reduction in systolic blood pressure at 6 months.

RESULTS

At baseline, the mean systolic blood pressure was 152.8 mm Hg in the intervention group and 154.6 mm Hg in the control group. At 6 months, the mean systolic blood pressure fell by 27.0 mm Hg (to 125.8 mm Hg) in the intervention group and by 9.3 mm Hg (to 145.4 mm Hg) in the control group; the mean reduction was 21.6 mm Hg greater with the intervention (95% confidence interval, 14.7 to 28.4; P<0.001). A blood-pressure level of less than 130/80 mm Hg was achieved among 63.6% of the participants in the intervention group versus 11.7% of the participants in the control group (P<0.001). In the intervention group, the rate of cohort retention was 95%, and there were few adverse events (three cases of acute kidney injury).

CONCLUSIONS

Among black male barbershop patrons with uncontrolled hypertension, health promotion by barbers resulted in larger blood-pressure reduction when coupled with medication management in barbershops by specialty-trained pharmacists. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02321618 .).

Team-Based Care with Pharmacists to Improve Blood Pressure: a Review of Recent Literature

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

We review studies published since 2014 that examined team-based care strategies and involved pharmacists to improve blood pressure (BP). We then discuss opportunities and challenges to sustainment of team-based care models in primary care clinics.

RECENT FINDINGS

Multiple studies presented in this review have demonstrated that team-based care including pharmacists can improve BP management. Studies highlighted the cost-effectiveness of a team-based pharmacy intervention for BP control in primary care clinics. Little information was found on factors influencing sustainability of team-based care interventions to improve BP control. Future work is needed to determine the best populations to target with team-based BP programs and how to implement team-based approaches utilizing pharmacists in diverse clinical settings. Future studies need to not only identify unmet clinical needs but also address reimbursement issues and stakeholder engagement that may impact sustainment of team-based care interventions.