Reasons why patients fail screening in Indian breast cancer trials

Analysis of Clinical Trial Screen Failures in Inflammatory Bowel Diseases [IBD]: Real World Results from the International Organization for the study of IBD

BACKGROUND

Recruitment for randomized controlled trials [RCTs] in inflammatory bowel diseases [IBD] has substantially dropped over time. This study aimed to assess reasons why IBD patients are not included in sponsored multicentre phase IIb-III RCTs.

METHODS

All IOIBD members [n = 58] were invited to participate. We divided barriers to participation as follows: [1] reasons patients with active IBD were not deemed appropriate for an RCT; [2] reasons qualified patients did not wish to participate; and [3] reasons for screen failure [SF] in patients agreeing to participate. We assess these in a 4-week prospective study including, consecutively, all patients with symptomatic disease for whom a treatment change was required. In addition, we performed a 6-month retrospective study to further evaluate reasons for SF.

RESULTS

A total of 106 patients (60 male [56.6%], 63 Crohn's disease [CD] [59.4%]), from ten centres across the world, were included in the prospective study. An RCT has not been proposed to 65 of them [mainly due to eligibility criteria]. Of the 41 patients to whom an RCT was offered, eight refused [mainly due to reluctance to receive placebo] and 28 agreed to participate. Among these 28 patients, five failed their screening and 23 were finally included in an RCT. A total of 107 patients (61 male [57%], 67 CD [62.6%]), from 13 centres worldwide, were included in our retrospective study of SFs. The main reason was insufficient disease activity.

CONCLUSION

This first multicentre study analysing reasons for non-enrolment in IBD RCTs shows that we lose patients at each step. Eligibility criteria, the risk of placebo assignment, and insufficient disease activity were part of the main barriers.

The usage of population and disease registries as pre-screening tools for clinical trials, a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review aims to outline the use of population and disease registries for clinical trial pre-screening.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The search was conducted in the time period of January 2014 to December 2022 in three databases: MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science Core Collection. References were screened using the Rayyan software, firstly based on titles and abstracts only, and secondly through full text review. Quality of the included studies was assessed using the List of Included Studies and quality Assurance in Review tool, enabling inclusion of publications of only moderate to high quality.

RESULTS

The search originally identified 1430 citations, but only 24 studies were included, reporting the use of population and/or disease registries for trial pre-screening. Nine disease domains were represented, with 54% of studies using registries based in the USA, and 62.5% of the studies using national registries. Half of the studies reported usage for drug trials, and over 478,679 patients were identified through registries in this review. Main advantages of the pre-screening methodology were reduced financial burden and time reduction.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

The use of registries for trial pre-screening increases reproducibility of the pre-screening process across trials and sites, allowing for implementation and improvement of a quality assurance process. Pre-screening strategies seem under-reported, and we encourage more trials to use and describe their pre-screening processes, as there is a need for standardized methodological guidelines.

The MATE trial: a multicentre, mixed-methodology, pilot, randomised controlled trial in neovascular age-related macular degeneration

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

In healthcare research investigating complex interventions, gaps in understanding of processes can be filled by using qualitative methods alongside a quantitative approach. The aim of this mixed-methods pilot trial was to provide feasibility evidence comparing two treatment regimens for neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) to inform a future large-scale randomised controlled trial (RCT).

SUBJECTS/METHODS

Forty-four treatment-naïve nAMD patients were followed over 24 months and randomised to one of two treatment regimens: standard care (SC) or treat and extend (T&E). The primary objective evaluated feasibility of the MATE trial via evaluations of screening logs for recruitment rates, nonparticipation and screen fails, whilst qualitative in-depth interviews with key study staff evaluated the recruitment phase and running of the trial. The secondary objective assessed changes in visual acuity and central retinal thickness (CRT) between the two treatment arms.

RESULTS

The overall recruitment rate was 3.07 participants per month with a 40.8% non-participation rate, 18.51% screen-failure rate and 15% withdrawal/non-completion rate. Key themes in the recruitment phase included human factors, protocol-related issues, recruitment processes and challenges. Both treatment regimens showed a trend towards a visual acuity gain at month 12 which was not maintained at month 24, whilst CRT reduced similarly in both regimens over the same time period. These were achieved with one less treatment following a T&E regimen.

CONCLUSION

This mixed-methodology, pilot RCT achieved its pre-defined recruitment, nonparticipation and screen failure rates, thus deeming it a success. With some minor protocol amendments, progression to a large-scale RCT will be achievable.

Analysis of the reasons for screening failure in phase I clinical trials in China: a retrospective study of the clinical trials screening process

Background

To analyze the main reasons for screening failure in the screening process of healthy subjects in phase I clinical trials and coping strategies.

Methods

We retrospectively collected data from the screening process of 1,640 healthy subjects in 12 phase I clinical trials conducted between April 2019 and July 2020 at the First Affiliated Hospital of Bengbu Medical College. The reasons for screening failure were statistically analyzed (χ² test), and correlation studies were conducted to explore the main factors associated with screening failure.

Results

Among the 1,640 healthy subjects, 632 (38.5%) successfully passed screening, and 1,008 (61.5%) failed screening. Abnormal laboratory test results (43.25%), abnormal vital sign examination results (11.81%), withdrawal of informed consent (10.02%), abnormal height/weight examination results (8.33%), and abnormal electrocardiogram (ECG) examination results (5.66%) accounted for 79.07% of the screening failures. Subjects aged 46–57 years were more likely to fail screening than those aged 18–30 or 31–45 years (158/220 vs. 541/893 vs. 309/527, respectively, P=0.002), and males were more likely than females to fail screening (721/1, 133 vs. 287/507, respectively, P=0.007). However, the distance between the subject’s residence and clinical trial institution (P=0.491) was not significantly correlated with screening failure.

Conclusions

Before trial screening, healthy subjects should be informed of the clinical trial risks and have sufficient time to consider or discuss participation with their family members. In addition, subjects should be informed that they should eat lightly, have adequate rest, and maintain a relaxed state of mind prior to screening. Regarding fluctuations in the normal range of laboratory indicators and ECG examination reports during the screening process, clinicians should determine the medical decision level (MDL) for each indicator. If no clinical significance is identified, then the subject can be included. In terms of sex and age, this study provides reasonable suggestions to further improve project protocols and improve the healthy subject screening success rate.

The implementation and utility of patient screening logs in a multicentre randomised controlled oncology trial

BACKGROUND

The utility of patient screening logs and their impact on improving trial recruitment rates are unclear. We conducted a retrospective exploratory analysis of screening data collected within a multicentre randomised controlled trial investigating chemotherapy for upper tract urothelial carcinoma.

METHODS

Participating centres maintained a record of patients meeting basic screening criteria stipulated in the trial protocol, submitting logs regularly to the clinical trial coordinating centre (CTC). Sites recorded the number of patients ineligible, not approached, declined and randomised. The CTC monitored proportions of eligible patients, approach rate (proportion of eligible patients approached) and acceptance rate (proportion recruited of those approached). Data were retrospectively analysed to identify patterns of screening activity and correlation with recruitment.

RESULTS

Data were collected between May 2012 and August 2016, during which time 71 sites were activated-a recruitment period of 2768 centre months. A total of 1138 patients were reported on screening logs, with 2300 requests for logs sent by the CTC and 47% of expected logs received. A total of 758 patients were reported as ineligible, 36 eligible patients were not approached and 207 declined trial participation. The approach rate was 91% (344/380), and the acceptance rate was 40% (137/344); these rates remained consistent throughout the data collection. The main reason patients provided for declining (99/207, 48%) was not wanting to receive chemotherapy. There was a moderately strong correlation (r = 0.47) between the number reported on screening logs and the number recruited per site. Considerable variation in data between centres was observed, and 54/191 trial participants (28%) enrolled during this period were not reported on logs.

CONCLUSIONS

Central collection of screening logs can identify reasons for patients declining trial participation and help monitor trial activity at sites; however, obtaining complete data can be challenging. There was a correlation between the number of patients reported on logs and recruitment; however, this was likely confounded by sites' available patient population. The use of screening logs may not be appropriate for all trials, and their use should be carefully considered in relation to the associated workload. No evidence was found that central collection of screening logs improved recruitment rates in this study, and their continued use warrants further investigation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN98387754 . Registered on 31 January 2012.

Recruitment and retention of the participants in clinical trials: Challenges and solutions

Drug development is a tedious and expensive procedure and it takes roughly 10 to 15 years to take a potential treatment from bench to bedside and costs the pharmaceutical companies as much as USD ~2 billion for the process. Delay in investigator-initiated studies can cause financial loss to grant providers (either public or private) and investigator's reputation may also be at stake. Participant recruitment and retention are two major bottlenecks in conducting clinical trials and contribute vastly to the delays. They are essential for both scientific validity of the clinical study and economic reasons. Thus, issues in recruitment and retention should be addressed and minimized. A proper recruitment and retention plan incorporating adequate communication between all stakeholders will eventually avoid the delays in drug development and make treatments available to the consumer at an earlier date and at a more affordable price. Awareness of challenges and reviewing strategies that can optimise recruitment and retention will facilitate drug development. The article gives a first-person perspective on challenges and proposed solutions from an experienced clinical study centre in a tertiary care hospital.

Influence of comorbidity on therapeutic decision making and impact on outcomes in patients with head and neck squamous cell cancers: Results from a prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

High prevalence of comorbidity in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) often lead to suboptimal treatment. The presence study aims to evaluate the presence of comorbidity, its impact on therapeutic decision making, treatment compliance, and overall survival in HNSCC.

METHODS

Five hundred eighteen patients with nonmetastatic HNSCC, elder than 18 years of age, without any prior history of cancer or anticancer treatment in the last 5 years were evaluated using Adult Comorbidity Evaluation 27 (ACE 27) index.

RESULTS

Two hundred ninety three (56.6%) patients had comorbidity, and 20.6% had deviation from the ideal treatment plan. Higher grade of comorbidity led to less likely completion of guideline-concordant therapy (moderate ACE 27 vs none: odds ratio [OR] 0.46, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.26-0.82, P < .01*; severe ACE 27 vs none: OR 0.23, 95% CI 0.08-0.57, P < .01*). Patients who completed guideline-concordant treatment had the best outcomes as compared to those who could not (median survival: not reached vs 9.56 months, hazard ratio 3.66, 95% CI: 2.8-4.79; P < .01*).

CONCLUSION

Presence of increasing severity of comorbidity in HNSCC influences therapeutic decision making. Survival outcomes are poorer in patients receiving guideline-discordant treatment.