Lessons Learned From a Direct Data Entry Phase 2 Clinical Trial Under a US Investigational New Drug Application

J. Mitchel, Judith M. Schloss Markowitz, H. Yin, D. Gittleman, T. Cho, Y. J. Kim, Joonhyuk Choi, M. Efros, K. Weingard, V. Tantsyura, D. Carrara
{"title":"Lessons Learned From a Direct Data Entry Phase 2 Clinical Trial Under a US Investigational New Drug Application","authors":"J. Mitchel, Judith M. Schloss Markowitz, H. Yin, D. Gittleman, T. Cho, Y. J. Kim, Joonhyuk Choi, M. Efros, K. Weingard, V. Tantsyura, D. Carrara","doi":"10.1177/0092861512449530","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In order to assess the impact of direct data entry (DDE) on the clinical trial process, a single-site, phase 2 clinical trial, under a US investigational new drug application (IND), was performed where the clinical site entered each subject’s data into an electronic data capture (EDC) system at the time of the office visit and the clinical research team implemented a risk-based monitoring (RBM) plan. For DDE, the trial used EDC for data collection and the electronic clinical trial record (eCTR) as the subject’s electronic source (eSource) record. A clinical data monitoring plan (CDMoP) defined the scope of source document verification, the frequency and scope of online data review, and the criteria for when to perform onsite monitoring. As a result of this novel approach to clinical research operations, (1) there were no protocol violations as screening errors were picked up prior to treatment; (2) because there were minimal transcription errors from paper source records to the EDC system, there was a major reduction in onsite monitoring compared to comparable studies that use paper source records; (3) EDC edit checks were able to be modified early in the course of the clinical trial; (4) compliance issues were identified in real time and corrected; (5) there was rapid transparency and detection of safety issues; and (6) the clinical site indicated that there were major cost savings overall and estimated that just in terms of data entry, it was able to save 70 hours of labor by not using paper as the original source records. It is postulated that once the pharmaceutical industry adopts DDE and RBM, there will be major increases in productivity for sponsors, clinical sites, and CROs, as well as reduced time to database lock and the statistical analyses. In addition to the productivity increases, these processes and tools will improve data integrity and quality and potentially reduce overall monitoring resources and efforts by an estimated 50% to 60%.","PeriodicalId":391574,"journal":{"name":"Drug information journal : DIJ / Drug Information Association","volume":"5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Drug information journal : DIJ / Drug Information Association","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0092861512449530","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

In order to assess the impact of direct data entry (DDE) on the clinical trial process, a single-site, phase 2 clinical trial, under a US investigational new drug application (IND), was performed where the clinical site entered each subject’s data into an electronic data capture (EDC) system at the time of the office visit and the clinical research team implemented a risk-based monitoring (RBM) plan. For DDE, the trial used EDC for data collection and the electronic clinical trial record (eCTR) as the subject’s electronic source (eSource) record. A clinical data monitoring plan (CDMoP) defined the scope of source document verification, the frequency and scope of online data review, and the criteria for when to perform onsite monitoring. As a result of this novel approach to clinical research operations, (1) there were no protocol violations as screening errors were picked up prior to treatment; (2) because there were minimal transcription errors from paper source records to the EDC system, there was a major reduction in onsite monitoring compared to comparable studies that use paper source records; (3) EDC edit checks were able to be modified early in the course of the clinical trial; (4) compliance issues were identified in real time and corrected; (5) there was rapid transparency and detection of safety issues; and (6) the clinical site indicated that there were major cost savings overall and estimated that just in terms of data entry, it was able to save 70 hours of labor by not using paper as the original source records. It is postulated that once the pharmaceutical industry adopts DDE and RBM, there will be major increases in productivity for sponsors, clinical sites, and CROs, as well as reduced time to database lock and the statistical analyses. In addition to the productivity increases, these processes and tools will improve data integrity and quality and potentially reduce overall monitoring resources and efforts by an estimated 50% to 60%.
从美国新药研究申请下的直接数据输入2期临床试验中获得的经验教训
为了评估直接数据输入(DDE)对临床试验过程的影响,在美国新药研究申请(IND)下进行了一项单站点2期临床试验,其中临床站点在办公室访问时将每个受试者的数据输入电子数据采集(EDC)系统,临床研究团队实施了基于风险的监测(RBM)计划。对于DDE,试验使用EDC进行数据收集,并使用电子临床试验记录(eCTR)作为受试者的电子来源(eSource)记录。临床数据监测计划(CDMoP)定义了源文件验证的范围,在线数据审查的频率和范围,以及何时进行现场监测的标准。由于这种新颖的临床研究操作方法,(1)没有违反协议,因为在治疗前发现了筛选错误;(2)由于从纸质源记录到EDC系统的转录错误最小,因此与使用纸质源记录的同类研究相比,现场监测的数量大大减少;(3) EDC编辑检查能够在临床试验早期进行修改;(4)实时发现并纠正合规问题;(5)安全问题的快速透明度和检测;(6)临床现场表明,总体上有很大的成本节约,估计仅在数据输入方面,由于不使用纸张作为原始来源记录,它可以节省70小时的劳动力。假设一旦制药行业采用DDE和RBM,将大大提高发起人、临床站点和cro的生产力,并减少数据库锁定和统计分析的时间。除了提高生产力外,这些流程和工具还将提高数据的完整性和质量,并有可能将总体监控资源和工作量减少约50%至60%。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信