PubMed Health⌕ Search

SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “Clinical Trials Data Monitoring Committees”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 235 records · Page 13Linked to original sources

Independent data monitoring committees: rationale, operations and controversies.

Data monitoring committees (DMCs) have become an increasingly common component of randomized clinical trials in recent years. As experience has accumulated, and more individuals and organizations have become involved in such activities, a variety of approaches to the operation of such committees has inevitably arisen. Because these committees play such a critical role in the process of new drug development, it is important to consider the implications of the different approaches that are being used. It is also timely to consider the present and possible future regulatory status of data monitoring committees. Published in 2001 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Clinical Trials as Topic↗

Operational and policy considerations of data monitoring in clinical trials: the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial experience.

Many clinical trials incorporate a system for monitoring emerging data that utilizes a committee composed of individuals who are independent of the investigators conducting the study. Although this is a common practice, there is a paucity of publications examining the operating methods of these groups. This paper describes the composition, functions, and procedures of the Data, Safety and Quality Review Group (DSQ) of the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT). The DSQ is not masked to emerging data and the voting membership is made up of individuals with a wide diversity of expertise that reflects the needs of the trial. There are also nonvoting exofficio members who represent other components of the study organization. In addition to data monitoring, the DSQ provides external review of coordinating center operations. A distinctive aspect of the DCCT's DSQ is the creation of a free-standing operations manual for the DSQ's use during the trial and the involvement of the study investigators in developing certain sections of this document. Utilizing a process that allowed participation of the investigators was considered critical to achieving a mutual understanding regarding the planned uses and interpretations of the study data prior to the study's completion so as to minimize the chances of major disagreements regarding the conclusions drawn. Equally important, the existence of such a manual provides documentable reassurance to all interested parties that both scientific integrity and patient safety are being closely watched and gives the study investigators confidence that the results of the study will be scientifically credible and clinically important.

Clinical Trials as Topic↗

Changes in patient screening for a clinical study of dental implants after increased awareness of tobacco use as a risk factor.

Independent external monitoring committees are an important part of scientific clinical trials. They monitor patient safety, study progress, investigators' performance, and accurate interpretation/reporting of the study data. Data trends observed by a study monitoring committee detected a change in the pattern of patient screening by investigators after an increased awareness that tobacco use could directly compromise the osseointegration of root-form dental implants. This increased awareness is believed to have altered the number of active smokers accepted into a multicenter prospective dental implant study. Recent data analyses indicate that the success ratios were improved by alterations in this discretionary inclusion-exclusion criterion.

Data Interpretation, Statistical↗

The design of the multicenter study of light reduction in retinopathy of prematurity (LIGHT-ROP).

BACKGROUND: The LIGHT-ROP Study was a multicenter, prospective, randomized, controlled, clinical trial designed to determine if a reduction in ambient light exposure to premature infants' eyes would reduce the incidence of retinopathy of prematurity (ROP). Previous clinical reports were contradictory and had one or more methodological flaws. METHODS: The LIGHT-ROP trial was designed in rigorous fashion to include randomization to treatment or control groups, masking of examiners, an adequate sample size of high-risk infants, a universal ROP classification system, a reliable and reproducible ophthalmologic examination protocol, a controlled method of light reduction, and monitoring of light levels in the nursery. The multicenter trial was conducted at three centers in Buffalo, Dallas, and San Antonio, with a separate coordinating center in Houston. The trial also utilized a separate data and safety monitoring committee. CONCLUSION: The design of the LIGHT-ROP study represents the most rigorous and largest clinical trial to date. It has demonstrated that light reduction does not reduce the incidence of confirmed ROP in high risk infants.

Humans↗

Interim analyses, stopping rules and data monitoring in clinical trials in Europe.

A survey was carried out to identify the current policies of European cooperative groups with respect to interim analyses, stopping rules and data monitoring of ongoing clinical trials. The policies differ widely, from informal interim analyses distributed among all participating investigators, to planned interim analyses carried out by an independent statistician and scrutinized by a data monitoring committee. Different situations clearly call for different policies: for instance, trials of new drugs in AIDS need to be monitored more closely than trials of non-toxic adjuvant therapies for cancer. Likewise, trials with an immediately measurable end-point (such as the large-scale trials in myocardial infarction) need more intensive monitoring than those in which the outcome assessment requires prolonged follow-up. In all cases, however, it seems useful to articulate explicit data monitoring procedures in the trial protocol. In general, an independent data monitoring committee is essential to advise on the desirability to continue accrual into the trial, or to stop it early.

Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome↗

Clinical trials with moving targets: a commentary on a non-inferiority trial in testicular cancer.

Clinical trials in cancer often have several measures of outcome, such as recurrence, survival, and toxic effects of treatment, and it is rare that the same treatment will be better for all outcomes. Benefits and risks therefore need to be balanced against one another. Quantification of this trade-off is a particular issue in so-called equivalence and non-inferiority trials in which a very small loss in survival (affecting few patients) is frequently deemed acceptable for a very large gain in toxic effects (affecting many). For various reasons, views about this trade-off can change during a trial's progress. From our experience of a recent chemotherapy trial for advanced testicular cancer, we discuss the issues that investigators, statisticians, and data monitoring and ethics committees face when the factors that affect the trade-off change substantially during the course of a clinical trial. We show the value of structured questionnaires--completed by clinicians who participate in the trial--that elicit individual decision-making change-points (or ranges of equivalence) with respect to the primary outcome measure, and discuss their use in the design and monitoring of equivalence and non-inferiority trials.

Clinical Trials as Topic↗

Data monitoring committees: the moral case for maximum feasible independence.

Since data monitoring committees (DMCs) began to be established in the 1970s, they have reviewed the clinical outcome data emerging from ongoing trials. The thesis of this essay is that DMCs most effectively promote the validity and credibility of randomized clinical trials when they perform this function with the maximum feasible independence. The essay argues that four types of individuals and groups should be excluded from the interim monitoring of outcome data: (1) investigators entering patients into a trial; (2) principal investigators or study chairs; (3) representatives of commercial firms connected with a trial; and (4) representatives of regulatory agencies. The role of statistical groups and officials of government funding agencies in the review of outcome data is also discussed.

Clinical Trials as Topic↗

Practical issues in data monitoring of clinical trials: summary of responses to a questionnaire at NIH.

A targeted poll was undertaken to compare and contrast models of data monitoring of randomized clinical trials sponsored by the National Institutes of Health. In an attempt to represent the institutes which conduct clinical trials, twelve individuals were selected and asked to respond to a questionnaire specifically prepared for this workshop. The response rate was 100 per cent. Most of the large trials sponsored by the institutes have independent, formally constituted data monitoring committees. There was one institute which does not have any data monitoring committees. The questionnaire is described in detail and a summary of the results is given.

Clinical Trials as Topic↗

Confronting the issues of patient safety and investigator conflict of interest in an international clinical trial of myocardial reperfusion. Global Utilization of Streptokinase and Tissue Plasminogen Activator for Occluded Coronary Arteries (GUSTO) Steering Committee.

The Global Utilization of Streptokinase and Tissue Plasminogen Activator for Occluded Coronary Arteries (GUSTO) trial is a large scale international trial of new myocardial reperfusion strategies. The primary hypothesis is that early and sustained coronary artery recanalization will be associated with a significant reduction in mortality. The four regimens that are being tested are 1) streptokinase with subcutaneous heparin; 2) streptokinase with intravenous heparin; 3) accelerated recombinant tissue-type plasminogen activator (rt-PA) with intravenous heparin; and 4) combination streptokinase, rt-PA and intravenous heparin. The planned recruitment of 41,600 patients in 1,500 sites from 15 countries is expected to be completed by December 1992 and will enable detection of a 15% reduction or 1% absolute difference in mortality compared with that associated with standard therapy (streptokinase and subcutaneous heparin). In designing the trial, two important issues were directly addressed. First, a strategy was developed to provide assurance of patient safety during large scale investigational use of an aggressive thrombolytic regimen. This includes fascimile transmission of a one-page safety summary form to the Data Coordinating Center within 24 h of death or discharge, acceptance of the concept of "net clinical benefit" and close surveillance of the trial's progress by the independent Data and Safety Monitoring Committee. Second, to avoid potential conflict of interest beyond elimination of any position of financial equity, the Steering Committee unanimously voted to prohibit any honoraria for speaking engagements, payment for consultancy or travel or reimbursement of any kind from any of the five corporate sponsors until 1 year after publication of the results. Incorporation of these approaches may facilitate the design of future large scale randomized trials in cardiovascular medicine.

Biomedical Research↗

Monitoring and ensuring safety during clinical research.

Increased numbers of clinical trials, many of which are large, multicenter, and sometimes international, and the marked shift of funding for clinical trials to industry have made apparent the inadequacy of mechanisms for protecting human subjects that were developed when clinical research was generally carried out on a small scale at single institutions. To address concerns regarding the protection of human subjects, a group of professionals with expertise in various aspects of clinical trials was assembled in May 2000. Participants described and evaluated the mechanisms by which clinical trials are monitored, focusing on adverse event reporting and the processes by which various parties with oversight responsibilities interact in the course of these trials. In this article, we describe the manner in which adverse event reporting might function to enhance safety and the role of data monitoring committees in using aggregate data from these reports, outline the problems that now exist for institutional review boards as they are faced with multiple adverse event reports from clinical trials while conducting continuing review, and offer recommendations for improving the current approach.

Clinical Trials as Topic↗

Terms of reference for Data and Safety Monitoring Committees.

The Data and Safety Monitoring Committee (DSMC) constitutes one of the most complex elements of a clinical trial. For this reason, it is critical that all participants in and contributors to a trial understand the functions and responsibilities of the DSMC. Failure to understand the complexity of this group's mission can lead to substantial opportunities for confusion among investigators, sponsors, regulators, and the public, especially if the trial that it monitors must be modified or terminated early.

Clinical Trials as Topic↗

[Monitoring of clinical trials and interim analysis. 1. Monitoring committee].

In order to fulfil the ethical principles linked to the protection of patients randomized in a controlled clinical trial, monitoring procedures need to be set up. In this context, a committee of experts, called the data monitoring committee is in charge of reviewing regularly unblinded data to assess the quality and the relevance of the trial, to evaluate the evidence of an emerging treatment difference and to control the rate of occurrence of serious adverse events. After each meeting, the monitoring committee reports to the steering committee its recommendation to continue or to stop the trial prematurely. Protocol modifications might be proposed as well. Illustrated with several examples, this article reviews different situations a monitoring committee might have to tackle with.

Clinical Protocols↗

Managing data for a randomised controlled clinical trial: experience from the WHO Antenatal Care Trial. WHO Antenatal Care Trial Research Group.

The World Health Organisation, in collaboration with four developing countries, is conducting a randomised controlled clinical trial to evaluate a new programme of antenatal care. In a city or region in Argentina, Cuba, Saudi Arabia and Thailand, 53 clinical units were randomly allocated to provide either the new programme or the programme currently in use. This paper describes the organisation of the data management system used to collect the data. Each woman participating in the trial is uniquely identified, and information such as her name, address and expected delivery date is recorded in the trial 'subject number list'. If the clinic belongs to the intervention group, information about the woman's eligibility is recorded on the classification form. Details of the outcome of the pregnancy are indicated on two additional case report forms: the antenatal hospital admission form and the summary form. When forms are completed by the investigators, they are submitted to the country data coordinating centre (CDCC). The CDCCs are responsible for the processing of the country study forms. This includes verification of the batch of forms, data capture into computer files, data verification, data validation, production of query sheets for data problems, maintenance and updating of study master files. All operations on data such as additions or modifications are performed using transaction processing. At monthly intervals, recruitment reports and transaction files are sent to the trial coordinating centre in Geneva. All transaction files are processed to accumulate data on the trial's consolidated master files. A monthly report including number of women recruited in the trial, adverse events reported by the countries, recruitment charts by clinic and analyses on eligible women in the intervention group is prepared and submitted to the data safety and monitoring committee. A workshop was organised in 1995, before the start of the trial, to introduce the data management system to the four participating countries. Annual site visits were made to each CDCC to monitor progress. Additional visits were made when major or critical problems could not be solved by the CDCC. At the closure of data collection, a visit is made to review and assess all data management procedures including form filling, maintenance of registers, computer files, query sheets, data modifications. In addition, final cleaning of the data is performed, and an analysis file is produced for inclusion in the centralised trial analyses and in the country-specific analyses. Based on the experience gained in this trial, the decentralised data management model can be advocated only if CDCCs that will be involved in the trial are already in place with competent and experienced staff. Uniformity of the data management system and of standard operating procedures across countries is also a crucial issue for the effective management of the data collection phase.

Argentina↗

Enucleation versus plaque irradiation for choroidal melanoma.

The Collaborative Ocular Melanoma Study (COMS) is an international, multicenter-controlled study. The organization includes an Executive Committee, Steering Committee, 6 Central Units, 32 Clinical Centers, and a Data and Safety Monitoring Committee. Scientifically, the COMS consists of (1) a randomized trial of patients with medium choroidal melanoma treated with enucleation versus iodine-125 plaque irradiation, (2) a randomized trial of patients with large choroidal melanoma treated with enucleation versus preenucleation external beam irradiation and enucleation, and (3) a prospective observational study of patients with small choroidal melanoma to determine whether a randomized trial of treatment is appropriate. In design and conduct of the COMS, special consideration is given to biostatistics and sample size considerations, iodine-125 plaque irradiation of choroidal melanoma, and coordinated ocular melanoma research. Recruitment is in progress. However, the pool of eligible patients is limited and the COMS needs the continued support and cooperation of ophthalmologists throughout the United States and Canada.

Brachytherapy↗