The potential influence of Internet-based social networking on the conduct of clinical research studies

The rapid growth of internet usage has led to an explosion of social networking sites for discussion of health issues. This provides a forum for subjects to communicate with one another during the course of the studies. Previous studies have raised concerns about the quality of health information on social networking sites, although none have evaluated content related to ongoing clinical trials. We reviewed material posted in virtual communities by self-identified clinical trial participants. We identified material posted in online health forums that could introduce bias into clinical research studies; we believe that this issue warrants further study and discussion. Physicians and others who conduct clinical trials should be aware of this issue. Study investigators and research teams should also talk to their study subjects about where and how they are obtaining information in order to prevent behaviors and correct misinformation that could put a subject's safety or the study objectives at risk. Given the rapid increase in Internet use for health care, a broader evaluation of both the benefits and potential risks of social networking among research participants during the course of a clinical trial appears warranted.     

Cross-Sectional Analysis of Data from the U.S. Clinical Trials Database Reveals Poor Translational Clinical Trial Effort for Traumatic Brain Injury,Compared with Stroke

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is an important public health problem, comparable to stroke in incidence and prevalence. Few interventions have proven efficacy in TBI, and clinical trials are, therefore, necessary to advance management in TBI. We describe the current clinical trial landscape in traumatic brain injury and compare it with the trial efforts for stroke. For this, we analysed all stroke and TBI studies registered on the US Clinical Trials (www.clinicaltrials.gov) database over a 10-year period (01/01/2000 to 01/31/2013). This methodology has been previously used to analyse clinical trial efforts in other specialties. We describe the research profile in each area: total number of studies, total number of participants and change in number of research studies over time. We also analysed key study characteristics, such as enrolment number and scope of recruitment. We found a mismatch between relative public health burden and relative research effort in each disease. Despite TBI having comparable prevalence and higher incidence than stroke, it has around one fifth of the number of clinical trials and participant recruitment. Both stroke and TBI have experienced an increase in the number of studies over the examined time period, but the rate of growth for TBI is one third that for stroke. Small-scale (<1000 participants per trial) and single centre studies form the majority of clinical trials in both stroke and TBI, with TBI having significantly fewer studies with international recruitment. We discuss the consequences of these findings and how the situation might be improved. A sustained research effort, entailing increased international collaboration and rethinking the methodology of running clinical trials, is required in order to improve outcomes after traumatic brain injury.     

Spotlight on chimeric antigen receptor engineered T cell research and clinical trials in China

T cell mediated adoptive immune response has been characterized as the key to anti-tumor immunity. Scientists around the world including in China, have been trying to harness the power of T cells against tumors for decades. Recently, the biosynthetic chimeric antigen receptor engineered T cell(CAR-T) strategy was developed and exhibited encouraging clinical efficacy, especially in hematological malignancies. Chimeric antigen receptor research reports began in 2009 in China according to our Pub Med search results. Clinical trials have been ongoing in China since 2013 according to the trial registrations on clinicaltrials.gov.. After years of assiduous efforts, research and clinical scientists in China have made their own achievements in the CAR-T therapy field. In this review, we aim to highlight CAR-T research and clinical trials in China, to provide an informative reference for colleagues in the field.     

Paradigms of expected failure

This study explores the outsourcing and offshoring of clinical trials and how they interconnect with the dynamics of drug development and regulation in the United States. I focus on the activities of United States-based contract research organizations, which make up a specialized global clinical trials industry focusing on the recruitment of human subjects and investigators. Tracking this industry’s activities in eastern Europe and Latin America, two clinical trial market ‘growth regions,’ I address the strategies of evidence-making that inform clinical trial offshoring. I also show how aspects of the clinical trial model—in which failures to predict safety outcomes or a paradigm of expected failure—are being exported along with the offshored trial. The clinical trials industry is a crucial, highly mobile, and profitable arm of the global pharmaceutical industry. Where state agencies furnish limited or no health care, drug developers claim that trial expansion and experiments have become social goods in themselves. But questions remain: How is drug value and research integrity maintained? And how do the results of clinical trials strengthen or undermine the delivery of affordable and effective interventions? As this essay shows, clinical trials are not only hypothesis-testing instruments; they are operative environments redistributing resources and occasioning tense medical and social fields. In highlighting the inefficiencies and uncertainties of global drug development, this study points to problems in the operational model of drug development and in systems of human protection. It also considers new forms of accountability at the nexus of private sector science and public health.     

Bioprospecting in the developing world.

During the past ten years, species-rich nations in the developing world have sought to capitalize on their 'biological patrimony' through a variety of business relationships with multinational corporations as a means of underwriting their conservation efforts. Initially lauded, these relationships have generated more rhetoric than revenues to date. The ramifications of these results on bioprospecting are discussed along with the foreseeable changes in models of collaboration.     

Do we want more cancer patients on clinical trials If so, what are the barriers to greater accrual

It is often stated that only a small proportion of adult cancer patients participate in clinical trials. This is said to be a bad thing, with calls for more trials to include more patients. Here I argue that whether or not greater accrual to clinical trials would be a good thing depends on the trials we conduct. The vast majority of clinical trials in cancer are currently early phase trials, and most do not lead to further studies even if they have encouraging results. The key metric is thus not the number of patients on clinical trials, but the number on the sort of large, randomized, Phase III trials that can be used as a basis for clinical decisions. I also address two important barriers to greater clinical trial participation. The first barrier is financial: clinical research has long been the poor cousin of basic research, with perhaps no more than a nickel in the cancer research dollar going to clinical research. The second barrier is regulatory: clinical research has become so overburdened by regulation that it takes years to initiate a trial, and dedicated staff just to deal with the paperwork once the trial starts. This not only adds significantly to the costs of clinical research, but scares many young investigators away. It has been estimated that nearly half of all US-sponsored trials are being conducted abroad, and it is plausible that excessive regulation is at least partly responsible. That statistic should serve as a wake-up call to the US clinical research community to implement the recommendations of the now decade-old report of National Cancer Institute Clinical Trials Program Review Group, which largely center around simplifying trials and streamlining trial procedures.     

Consent for participating in clinical trials ‐ Is it really informed?

The article explores the challenges of ensuring voluntary and informed consent which is obtained from potential research subjects in the north‐eastern part of Romania. This study is one of the first empirical papers of this nature in Romania. The study used a quantitative survey design using the adapted Quality of Informed Consent (QuIC) questionnaire. The target population consisted of 100 adult persons who voluntarily enrolled in clinical trials. The informed consent form must contain details regarding the potential risks and benefits, the aim of the clinical trial, study design, confidentiality, insurance and contact details in case of additional questions. Our study confirmed that although all required information was included in the ICF, few clinical trial participants truly understood it. We also found that the most important predictive factor for a good subjective and objective understanding of the clinical trial was the level of education. Our study suggests that researchers should consider putting more effort in order to help clinical trials participants achieve a better understanding of the informed consent. In this way they will ensure that participants’ decision‐making is meaningful and that their interests are protected.     

Clinical Research: A Globalized Network

Clinical research has become increasingly globalized, but the extent of globalization has not been assessed. To describe the globalization of clinical research, we used all (n = 13,208) multinational trials registered at ClinicalTrials.gov to analyzed geographic connections among individual countries. Our findings indicate that 95% (n = 185) of all countries worldwide have participated in multinational clinical research. Growth in the globalization of clinical research peaked in 2009, suggesting that the global infrastructure that supports clinical research might have reached its maximum capacity. Growth in the globalization of clinical research is attributable to increased involvement of non-traditional markets, particularly in South America and Asia. Nevertheless, Europe is the most highly interconnected geographic region (60.64% of global connections), and collectively, Europe, North America, and Asia comprise more than 85% of all global connections. Therefore, while the expansion of clinical trials into non-traditional markets has increased over the last 20 years and connects countries across the globe, traditional markets still dominate multinational clinical research, which appears to have reached a maximum global capacity.     

Ethical Issues in Field Trials of Genetically Modified Disease‐Resistant Mosquitoes

Mosquito‐borne diseases take a tremendous toll on human populations, especially in developing nations. In the last decade, scientists have developed mosquitoes that have been genetically modified to prevent transmission of mosquito‐borne diseases, and field trials have been conducted. Some mosquitoes have been rendered infertile, some have been equipped with a vaccine they transmit to humans, and some have been designed to resist diseases. This article focuses on ethical issues raised by field trials of disease‐resistant, genetically modified mosquitoes. Some of these issues include: protecting the public and the environment from harm, balancing benefits and risks, collaborating with the local community, avoiding exploitation, and safeguarding the rights and welfare of research subjects. One of the most difficult problems involves protecting the welfare of community members who will be impacted by the release of mosquitoes but who are not enrolled in the study as research subjects. To address this concern, field trials should take place only when the targeted disease is a significant public health problem in an isolated area, the benefits of the trial for the community are likely to outweigh the risks, community leaders approve of the trial, and there are measures in place to protect the welfare of un‐enrolled community members, such as informing the community about the study and offering free treatment to people who contract mosquito‐borne diseases. Since the justification of any field trial depends on a careful examination of the scientific and ethical issues, proposed studies should be evaluated on a case‐by‐case basis.     

Reference ranges for the clinical laboratory derived from a rural population in Kericho, Kenya

The conduct of Phase I/II HIV vaccine trials internationally necessitates the development of region-specific clinical reference ranges for trial enrollment and participant monitoring. A population based cohort of adults in Kericho, Kenya, a potential vaccine trial site, allowed development of clinical laboratory reference ranges. Lymphocyte immunophenotyping was performed on 1293 HIV seronegative study participants. Hematology and clinical chemistry were performed on up to 1541 cohort enrollees. The ratio of males to females was 1.9:1. Means, medians and 95% reference ranges were calculated and compared with those from other nations. The median CD4+ T cell count for the group was 810 cells/microl. There were significant gender differences for both red and white blood cell parameters. Kenyan subjects had lower median hemoglobin concentrations (9.5 g/dL; range 6.7-11.1) and neutrophil counts (1850 cells/microl; range 914-4715) compared to North Americans. Kenyan clinical chemistry reference ranges were comparable to those from the USA, with the exception of the upper limits for bilirubin and blood urea nitrogen, which were 2.3-fold higher and 1.5-fold lower, respectively. This study is the first to assess clinical reference ranges for a highland community in Kenya and highlights the need to define clinical laboratory ranges from the national community not only for clinical research but also care and treatment.     

Best practices for design and implementation of human clinical trials studying dietary oils

Dietary oils are a significant contributor to overall energy and fatty acid intakes. Changes in the amount and/or type of dietary oils consumed have the potential to impact human health. Clinical trials represent the gold standard for testing the health impacts of such changes in dietary oils. The objective of this review is to explore best practices for clinical trials examining impacts of dietary oils including 1) pre-clinical topics such as research question generation, study design, participant population, outcome measures and intervention product selection and/or preparation; 2) clinical trial implementation topics such as recruitment, trial management, record keeping and compliance monitoring; and 3) post-clinical trial topics dealing with sample analysis and storage as well as management, publication and data access. The use of digital case report forms, and the best practices in reporting and publishing results are also addressed. In summary, properly designed and implemented clinical trials studying dietary oils produce strong scientific evidence-guiding their use.     

The distribution of biomedical research resources and international justice

According to some estimates, less than 10% of the world's biomedical research funds are dedicated to addressing problems that are responsible for 90% of the world's burden of disease. This paper explains why this disparity exists and what should be done about it. It argues that the disparity exists because: 1) multinational pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies do not regard research and development investments on the health problems of developing nations to be economically lucrative; and 2) governmental agencies that sponsor biomedical research face little political pressure to allocate funds for the problems of developing nations. This paper argues that developed nations have an obligation to address disparities related to biomedical research funding. To facilitate this effort, developed countries should establish a trust fund dedicated to research on the health problems of developing nations similar to the Global AIDS Fund.     

Ethical Issues in a Stage 1 Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy Feasibility Study and Trial to Reduce Alcohol Use Among HIV-Infected Outpatients in Western Kenya

epidemics of both HIV/AIDS and alcohol abuse in sub-Saharan Africa have spurred the conduct of local behavioral therapy trials for these problems, but the ethical issues involved in these trials have not been fully examined. In this paper, we discuss ethical issues that emerged during the conduct of a behavioral intervention adaptation and trial using cognitive-behavioral therapy to reduce alcohol use among HIV-infected outpatients in Eldoret, Kenya. The study was performed within our multinational collaboration, the USAID-Academic Model Providing Access to Healthcare Partnership. We discuss relevant ethical considerations and how we addressed them.     

间充质干细胞基础研究与临床转化的中美比较

目的：从基础研究、专利申请、临床试验角度对比分析中美间充质干细胞领域发展现状和趋势,了解中美间充质干细胞领域研究的主要特征,为中国间充质干细胞领域的发展提供建议。方法：检索SCI论文数据、DII专利数据及Clinical Trials临床试验数据及新药审批情况,利用Excel、DDA工具对检索结果进行定量分析和讨论。结果：中国在间充质干细胞基础研究、专利申请及临床试验方面虽起步较晚,但近年来发展迅速,论文、专利和临床试验数量快速增长,2014年起发表论文数量及2016年申请专利数量均超过美国,临床试验注册已达200余项;在骨质疏松、脊髓损伤等研究领域,内分泌系统疾病、自体免疫疾病等临床试验方面形成一定优势,已具备坚实的团队与技术基础。但我国间充质干细胞研究仍面临激烈的竞争,存在进步与发展空间。结论：我国间充质干细胞研究应发挥已有优势,加强战略性布局;重视发展以企业为主导的新药开发路径;做精做细以增强国际竞争力与影响力;加大资金投入和产业政策的支持;健全监管机制及评价体系,抓住机遇的同时积极迎接挑战。     

A novel approach to reducing disparities in health outcomes by enhancing interpretation of cancer clinical trials for underrepresented patient groups

There has been a growing realization, based on emerging evidence from the point of care, that real-world outcomes of patients with cancer are often inferior to those reported in conventional clinical trials. This phenomenon can be attributed in part to deficits in external validity that are present in many studies. Several factors contribute to external validity deficits, including: narrow eligibility criteria; differences between protocol-specified procedures and routine care; and inadequate access to clinical trial participation among underrepresented and socioeconomically disadvantaged groups. As a result, the current body of clinical evidence derived from conventional clinical trials can be inadequate to inform patient-specific treatment decisions at the point of care. Furthermore, lack of practical guidance on how to evaluate the impact of external validity deficits can impede both the design of more generalizable clinical trials and efforts to personalize treatment decisions for individual patients. In this methodological review, we suggest an approach to aid clinicians in such evaluations, providing visual and quantitative methods for assessing the magnitude of, and adjusting for, the impact of external validity deficits in conventional clinical trials. Our methods and visualizations have broad applicability across important areas of real-world medical decision-making and research, providing opportunities to design clinical studies that are more reflective of the diverse needs of patients with cancer, including those excluded from traditional clinical trials due to narrow eligibility criteria, socioeconomic disadvantages, and other systemic barriers to equitable access to healthcare resources.     

Ethical Considerations for Outcome‐adaptive Trial Designs: A Clinical Researcher's Perspective

In a typical comparative clinical trial the randomization scheme is fixed at the beginning of the study, and maintained throughout the course of the trial. A number of researchers have championed a randomized trial design referred to as ‘outcome‐adaptive randomization.’ In this type of trial, the likelihood of a patient being enrolled to a particular arm of the study increases or decreases as preliminary information becomes available suggesting that treatment may be superior or inferior. While the design merits of outcome‐adaptive trials have been debated, little attention has been paid to significant ethical concerns that arise in the conduct of such studies. These include loss of equipoise, lack of processes for adequate informed consent, and inequalities inherent in the research design which could lead to perceptions of injustice that may have negative implications for patients and the research enterprise. This article examines the ethical difficulties inherent in outcome‐adaptive trials.