New Benchmarks on Protocol Amendment Practices, Trends and their Impact on Clinical Trial Performance.

IF 2 4区 医学 Q4 MEDICAL INFORMATICS Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science Pub Date : 2024-05-01 Epub Date: 2024-03-04 DOI:10.1007/s43441-024-00622-9
Kenneth Getz, Zachary Smith, Emily Botto, Elisabeth Murphy, Arnaud Dauchy
{"title":"New Benchmarks on Protocol Amendment Practices, Trends and their Impact on Clinical Trial Performance.","authors":"Kenneth Getz, Zachary Smith, Emily Botto, Elisabeth Murphy, Arnaud Dauchy","doi":"10.1007/s43441-024-00622-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The Tufts Center for the Study of Drug Development (Tufts CSDD) conducted a follow-up study in 2022 to assess trends in protocol amendment experiences and the impact amendments have had on clinical trial performance, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic. Sixteen pharmaceutical companies and contract research organizations provided data on 950 protocols and 2188 amendments. The results show that, since 2015, the prevalence of protocols with at least one amendment in phases I-IV has increased substantially (from 57 to 76%) and the mean number of amendments per protocol has increased 60% to 3.3, up from 2.1. Phase I and III protocols saw the highest increases in the mean number of amendments implemented per protocol. A much higher percentage of amendments-77%-were deemed unavoidable with regulatory agency requests and changes to the study strategy as the top reasons cited for amending a protocol. The total average duration to implement an amendment has nearly tripled during the past decade. The time from identifying the need-to-amend to last oversight approval now takes an average of 260 days and the mean duration during which investigative sites operate with different versions of the clinical trial protocol spans 215 days. Protocols that implemented at least one amendment were more effective at increasing patient screening volume and reducing the actual number of patients enrolled relative to plan. Lastly, the prevalence of protocols with at least one amendment and mean number of amendments was significantly higher for protocols conducted during the pandemic.</p>","PeriodicalId":23084,"journal":{"name":"Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s43441-024-00622-9","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICAL INFORMATICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The Tufts Center for the Study of Drug Development (Tufts CSDD) conducted a follow-up study in 2022 to assess trends in protocol amendment experiences and the impact amendments have had on clinical trial performance, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic. Sixteen pharmaceutical companies and contract research organizations provided data on 950 protocols and 2188 amendments. The results show that, since 2015, the prevalence of protocols with at least one amendment in phases I-IV has increased substantially (from 57 to 76%) and the mean number of amendments per protocol has increased 60% to 3.3, up from 2.1. Phase I and III protocols saw the highest increases in the mean number of amendments implemented per protocol. A much higher percentage of amendments-77%-were deemed unavoidable with regulatory agency requests and changes to the study strategy as the top reasons cited for amending a protocol. The total average duration to implement an amendment has nearly tripled during the past decade. The time from identifying the need-to-amend to last oversight approval now takes an average of 260 days and the mean duration during which investigative sites operate with different versions of the clinical trial protocol spans 215 days. Protocols that implemented at least one amendment were more effective at increasing patient screening volume and reducing the actual number of patients enrolled relative to plan. Lastly, the prevalence of protocols with at least one amendment and mean number of amendments was significantly higher for protocols conducted during the pandemic.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
协议修订实践、趋势及其对临床试验绩效影响的新基准。
塔夫茨药物开发研究中心(Tufts CSDD)于 2022 年开展了一项后续研究,以评估方案修订经验的趋势以及修订对临床试验绩效的影响,尤其是在 COVID-19 大流行期间。16 家制药公司和合同研究组织提供了 950 个方案和 2188 次修订的数据。结果显示,自 2015 年以来,I-IV 期至少有一次修订的方案比例大幅增加(从 57% 增加到 76%),每个方案的平均修订次数从 2.1 次增加到 3.3 次,增幅达 60%。第 I 和第 III 阶段规程的平均修正次数增幅最大。更高的修订比例(77%)被认为是不可避免的,监管机构的要求和研究策略的改变是修订方案的首要原因。在过去十年中,实施修订的总平均时间几乎增加了两倍。现在,从确定需要修订到最后获得监管机构批准平均需要 260 天,研究机构使用不同版本临床试验方案的平均时间为 215 天。至少实施过一次修订的方案在增加患者筛选量和减少实际入组患者数量方面比计划更为有效。最后,在大流行期间实施的方案中,至少进行过一次修订的方案比例和平均修订次数明显更高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science
Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science MEDICAL INFORMATICS-PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
13.30%
发文量
127
期刊介绍: Therapeutic Innovation & Regulatory Science (TIRS) is the official scientific journal of DIA that strives to advance medical product discovery, development, regulation, and use through the publication of peer-reviewed original and review articles, commentaries, and letters to the editor across the spectrum of converting biomedical science into practical solutions to advance human health. The focus areas of the journal are as follows: Biostatistics Clinical Trials Product Development and Innovation Global Perspectives Policy Regulatory Science Product Safety Special Populations
期刊最新文献
Comparison of Product Features and Clinical Trial Designs for the DTx Products with the Indication of Insomnia Authorized by Regulatory Authorities. A Framework for the Use and Likelihood of Regulatory Acceptance of Single-Arm Trials Correction: Advanced Regenerative Medicines for Rare Diseases: A Review of Industry Sponsors Investment Motivations. Latest Developments in “Adaptive Enrichment” Clinical Trial Designs in Oncology Advanced Regenerative Medicines for Rare Diseases: A Review of Industry Sponsors Investment Motivations
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1