Basic steps to building a research program

Are community oncology practices with or without clinical research programs different? A comparison of patient and practice characteristics

BACKGROUND

Expanding access to clinical trials in community settings is a potential approach to addressing disparities in accrual of historically underrepresented populations. However, little is known about the characteristics of practices that do not participate in research. We investigated differences in patient and practice characteristics of US community oncology practices with high vs low engagement in clinical research.

METHODS

We included patients from a real-world, nationwide electronic health record-derived, de-identified database who received active treatment for cancer at community oncology practices between November 1, 2017, and October 31, 2022. We assessed patient and practice characteristics and their associations with high vs low research engagement using descriptive analyses and logistic regression models.

RESULTS

Of the 178 practices, 70 (39.3%) events had high research engagement, treated 57.8% of the overall 568 540 patient cohort, and enrolled 3.25% of their patients on cancer treatment trials during the 5-year observation period (vs 0.27% enrollment among low engagement practices). Practices with low vs high research engagement treated higher proportions of the following patient groups: ages 75 years and older (24.2% vs 21.8%), non-Latinx Black (12.6% vs 10.3%) or Latinx (11.6% vs 6.1%), were within the lowest socioeconomic status quintile (21.9% vs16.5%), and were uninsured or had no documented insurance (22.2% vs 13.6%).

CONCLUSIONS

Patient groups historically underrepresented in oncology clinical trials are more likely to be treated at community practices with limited or no access to trials. These results suggest that investments to expand the clinical research footprint among practices with low research engagement could help address persistent inequities in trial representation.

Characteristics and duties of clinical research nurses: a scoping review

Introduction

The characteristics and duties of clinical research nurses (CRNs) are constantly developing and changing with the progress of medical technology and increasing needs in patient care. With the continuous deepening and standardization of clinical trials, the importance and status of CRNs during the whole process of clinical trials are also increasingly valued.

Methods

A scoping review of studies related to the characteristics and duties of CRNs was conducted to clarify relevant roles and concepts. An electronic search was conducted on three English databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Embase) and two Chinese databases (CNKI and Wanfang database) in December 2023. Two authors independently screened the literature, extracted information from the included literature, and summarized and reported the findings.

Results

A total of 26 articles published between 1991 and 2023 were analyzed, and four characteristics of CRNs were identified as participants and managers of clinical trials, caregivers and protectors of subjects, coordinators of research teams, and educators. Basic knowledge, skills and literacy, communication and coordination ability, and advanced research ability are the competencies required for CRNs.

Conclusion

Further studies should focus on the importance of various characteristics of CRNs, so as to improve the quality of clinical trials and promote clinical evidence-based practice.

How we established a multidisciplinary program for vascular anomalies

The care of patients with vascular anomalies is quickly becoming a complex field requiring high-quality, coordinated multidisciplinary care. In this article, we review the history of multidisciplinary care in this field, discuss the benefits of this model of care, and outline some of the essential components and structure of a successful vascular anomalies team. We provide an overview of two example programs and a roadmap for other centers to develop their own multidisciplinary vascular anomalies teams.

Orthopaedic clinical research: building a team that lasts

Medical progress, including in the orthopaedic surgery field, depends on the interaction and collaboration between: physicians, with their expertise on the clinical setting; scientists, with their expertise on the research setting; and professionals who are skilled in both settings (clinical scientists). This leads to the need to develop research approaches which involves people who are committed and support the process, strategic planning, and a cohesive team that can execute the tasks. All these interactions must be supported financially in order to maintain the long-term viability of such team.

Time management is crucial for the clinical research team. To ensure success, the research team must be flexible in order to adapt to dynamic clinical and surgical schedules. It is especially important that surgeons have regular, dedicated quality research time to maintain a consistent interaction with the team.

Building a successful and productive orthopaedic clinical research programme involves many challenges in creating proper leadership, obtaining funding, setting proper resources, establishing necessary training, and providing guidance and insight around the importance of each role that every member plays on the team.

Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2021;6:245-251. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.6.200058

Critical Aspects of a Sustainable Clinical Research Program in the Community-Based Oncology Practice

Increasing enrollment into clinical trials is a top priority across the field of oncology. Because the vast majority of those afflicted with cancer receive their care in the community, creating strong clinical research programs in the community-based setting is important. This article comprehensively outlines the most important elements of creating and sustaining a successful community-based research program. Establishing a clear mission and defining the scope of the research program in collaboration with key physicians and administrative leadership are critical to success. Standard operating procedures should detail operational processes. Ensuring sound financial planning and protected physician time are crucial for a healthy program. Providing mentorship opportunities to investigators and other team members will provide necessary guidance for junior investigators and long-term program stability. Prioritizing provider and patient volunteer engagement through education and awareness will potentially improve enrollment and research ownership. Incorporating administrative and clinical research staff and health care providers, including physicians, advanced practice providers, and pharmacists, will result in a multidisciplinary and unified approach and may also promote research as a routine part of patient care. Regular safety and scientific meetings will reduce regulatory complications and, most importantly, improve patient care. Other keys to a successful program include establishing a diverse trial portfolio, collaboration between different institutions, and ensuring appropriate technological infrastructure. Serial programmatic review provides opportunities to refine suboptimal practices and recognize successful strategies. Community-based research programs are critical to improve access to optimal cancer care. Implementation of successful programs is possible with a collaborative and multidisciplinary approach.

So You Want to Be a Principal Investigator

Therapeutic trials represent the front line of clinical progress, where the rubber meets the road. The conduct of clinical trials requires unique skills, innate as well as learned, on the part of the investigators who conduct these studies. Often such skills are acquired on the job and are passed on from mentor to junior investigator. However, over the years, the role of the principal investigator (PI) has evolved into a vast list of roles and responsibilities that cannot readily be conveyed through a hands-on approach alone. The fast-paced tempo of drug discovery and development, and the ever-increasing numbers of therapeutic trials being conducted in the United States, combined with a decline in the number of new clinical investigators, have exposed a gap between the expectations placed on the PI and the training and experience of today's young clinicians, who are being asked to take on the responsibilities outlined in Food and Drug Administration Form 1572. This article aims to begin an exploration of the role and increasing responsibilities of a PI and the growing need for structured investigator training. We propose options to better equip the PI to achieve compliance with Good Clinical Practice.

A cross-cutting approach to enhancing clinical trial site success: The Department of Veterans Affairs' Network of Dedicated Enrollment Sites (NODES) model

Background

Recruitment into clinical trials remains a key determinant to study completion and success. While various strategies have been proposed, it is unclear how they apply across different populations, diseases, and/or study goals. The ability to effectively overcome challenges may require different approaches that more broadly focus on addressing obstacles among sites that cannot be overcome by individual studies.

Methods

The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Cooperative Studies Program (CSP) established the Network of Dedicated Enrollment Sites (NODES) as a consortium of sites to generate systematic site-level solutions to more efficiently recruit in CSP studies. Initial activities identified priorities and developed approaches through team-based efforts. Metrics were also developed to assess overall network performance.

Results

Network efforts produced several new strategies and best practices for common problems in CSP research. Recruitment strategies included bringing studies to patients and developing data programs using algorithms for finding eligible patients. Efficiency efforts focused on cross-training and standardizing performance reports.

Conclusion

NODES addressed site challenges in clinical trial recruitment and management by taking an overall approach that looked at the system rather than individual studies. Practices and operational changes were implemented for CSP research related to recruitment, staff training and research methodology. The network activities suggest that team-based development of tools and insights may help better identify targets and increase efficiencies for clinical trials recruitment.

The National Cancer Institute-American Society of Clinical Oncology Cancer Trial Accrual Symposium: summary and recommendations

INTRODUCTION

Many challenges to clinical trial accrual exist, resulting in studies with inadequate enrollment and potentially delaying answers to important scientific and clinical questions.

METHODS

The National Cancer Institute (NCI) and the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) cosponsored the Cancer Trial Accrual Symposium: Science and Solutions on April 29-30, 2010 to examine the state of accrual science related to patient/community, physician/provider, and site/organizational influences, and identify new interventions to facilitate clinical trial enrollment. The symposium featured breakout sessions, plenary sessions, and a poster session including 100 abstracts. Among the 358 attendees were clinical investigators, researchers of accrual strategies, research administrators, nurses, research coordinators, patient advocates, and educators. A bibliography of the accrual literature in these three major areas was provided to participants in advance of the meeting. After the symposium, the literature in these areas was revisited to determine if the symposium recommendations remained relevant within the context of the current literature.

RESULTS

Few rigorously conducted studies have tested interventions to address challenges to clinical trials accrual. Attendees developed recommendations for improving accrual and identified priority areas for future accrual research at the patient/community, physician/provider, and site/organizational levels. Current literature continues to support the symposium recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

A combination of approaches addressing both the multifactorial nature of accrual challenges and the characteristics of the target population may be needed to improve accrual to cancer clinical trials. Recommendations for best practices and for future research developed from the symposium are provided.

Site-based research in acute heart failure

The conduct of clinical trials in acute heart failure has arrived at a critical point. Traditional systems used to conduct clinical trials have been described as inefficient, lacking infrastructure, and enormously expensive. In this article, the authors describe an alternative model: the development of a site-based research (SBR) unit, an operating business unit responsible for conducting a portfolio of research projects in a therapeutic area. The SBR is responsible for financial accountability, regulatory compliance, and academic productivity.

Clinical research nursing: a critical resource in the national research enterprise

Translational clinical research has emerged as an important priority for the national research enterprise, with a clearly stated mandate to more quickly deliver prevention strategies, treatments and cures based on scientific innovations to the public. Within this national effort, a lack of consensus persists concerning the need for clinical nurses with expertise and specialized training in study implementation and the delivery of care to research participants. This paper reviews efforts to define and document the role of practicing nurses in implementing studies and coordinating clinical research in a variety of clinical settings, and differentiates this clinical role from the role of nurses as scientists and principal investigators. We propose an agenda for building evidence that having nurses provide and coordinate study treatments and procedures can potentially improve research efficiency, participant safety, and the quality of research data. We also provide recommendations for the development of the emerging specialty of clinical research nursing.