scholarly journals The COVID-19 Trial Finder

Author(s):  
Yingcheng Sun ◽  
Alex Butler ◽  
Fengyang Lin ◽  
Hao Liu ◽  
Latoya A Stewart ◽  
...  

Abstract Clinical trials are the gold standard for generating reliable medical evidence. The biggest bottleneck in clinical trials is recruitment. To facilitate recruitment, tools for patient search of relevant clinical trials have been developed, but users often suffer from information overload. With nearly 700 coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) trials conducted in the United States as of August 2020, it is imperative to enable rapid recruitment to these studies. The COVID-19 Trial Finder was designed to facilitate patient-centered search of COVID-19 trials, first by location and radius distance from trial sites, and then by brief, dynamically generated medical questions to allow users to prescreen their eligibility for nearby COVID-19 trials with minimum human computer interaction. A simulation study using 20 publicly available patient case reports demonstrates its precision and effectiveness.

2012 ◽  
Vol 2 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Eisenberg ◽  
◽  
Petra Kaufmann ◽  
Ellen Sigal ◽  
Janet Woodcock ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 224 (2) ◽  
pp. S433
Author(s):  
Cynthia Coots ◽  
Stephen Wagner ◽  
Matthew J. Bicocca ◽  
Megha Gupta ◽  
Hector Mendez Figueroa ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (Supplement_2) ◽  
pp. ii79-ii79
Author(s):  
Kathryn Nevel ◽  
Samuel Capouch ◽  
Lisa Arnold ◽  
Katherine Peters ◽  
Nimish Mohile ◽  
...  

Abstract BACKGROUND Patients in rural communities have less access to optimal cancer care and clinical trials. For GBM, access to experimental therapies, and consideration of a clinical trial is embedded in national guidelines. Still, the availability of clinical trials to rural communities, representing 20% of the US population, has not been described. METHODS We queried ClinicalTrials.gov for glioblastoma interventional treatment trials opened between 1/2010 and 1/2020 in the United States. We created a Structured Query Language database and leveraged Google application programming interfaces (API) Places to find name and street addresses for the sites, and Google’s Geocode API to determine the county location. Counties were classified by US Department of Agriculture Rural-Urban Continuum Codes (RUCC 1–3 = urban and RUCC 4–9 = rural). We used z-ratios for rural-urban statistical comparisons. RESULTS We identified 406 interventional treatment trials for GBM at 1491 unique sites. 8.7% of unique sites were in rural settings. Rural sites opened an average of 1.7 trials/site and urban sites 2.8 trials/site from 1/2010–1/2020. Rural sites offered more phase II trials (63% vs 57%, p= 0.03) and fewer phase I trials (22% vs 28%, p= 0.01) than urban sites. Rural locations were more likely to offer federally-sponsored trials (p< 0.002). There were no investigator-initiated or single-institution trials offered at rural locations, and only 1% of industry trials were offered rurally. DISCUSSION Clinical trials for GBM were rarely open in rural areas, and were more dependent on federal funding. Clinical trials are likely difficult to access for rural patients, and this has important implications for the generalizability of research as well as how we engage the field of neuro-oncology and patient advocacy groups in improving patient access to trials. Increasing the number of clinical trials in rural locations may enable more rural patients to access and enroll in GBM studies.


2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S246-S246
Author(s):  
Kevin O’Laughlin ◽  
Jennifer R Cope ◽  
Zachary A Marsh

Abstract Background Acanthamoeba is a free-living ameba found worldwide in soil and water that can cause severe illness. Transmission is thought to be through the skin, eyes, or lungs; Acanthamoeba can cause disseminated infection (Acanthamoeba disease) in addition to the more widely recognized Acanthamoeba keratitis. Infections however are rare, and only case reports or small case series have been published. We review Acanthamoeba disease cases from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) free-living ameba registry to characterize the disease in the United States. Methods CDC maintains a free-living ameba (FLA) registry of laboratory-confirmed Acanthamoeba cases (excluding keratitis) sourced from published case reports, CDC case report forms, and CDC laboratory results. SAS© version 9.4 software was used to calculate descriptive statistics and frequencies. Results We identified 163 cases of Acanthamoeba disease between 1956 and 2018. Of cases with documented outcome, 85% were fatal (105/124). Most (88%) cases were in patients who were immunocompromised (136/155): 66 people living with HIV (of whom 49 were classified as having AIDS); 33 recipients of organ transplantation; 30 people diagnosed with malignancy. The most common manifestation of disease was encephalitis (49%). Other clinical presentations included cutaneous lesions (20%) and rhinosinusitis (6%); 40 cases involved multiple organ systems. Median patient age was 42 years (range 0–83 years). Males accounted for 71% (114/160) of cases. California (29) and Texas (14) had the most case reports; 30 other states reported cases. The source of exposure was unknown in most cases (75%); soil and water were documented in 14 and 17 cases, respectively. Conclusion Acanthamoeba disease in the United States is primarily characterized by encephalitis and cutaneous lesions that affect predominately immunocompromised individuals. Acanthamoeba as a cause of encephalitis in immunocompromised patients should be considered by clinicians, which may lead to earlier diagnosis and treatment. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures


2019 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 147-152 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Eisenman

Introduction: A dramatic increase in the number of clinical trials involving gene-modified cell therapy and gene therapy is taking place. The field is on the verge of a boom, and the regulatory environment is evolving to accommodate the growth. Discussion: This commentary summarizes the current state of the field, including an overview of the growth. The United States (US) regulatory structure for gene therapy will be summarized, and the evolution of the oversight structure will be explained. Conclusion: The gene therapy field has recently produced its first FDA-approved therapeutics and has a pipeline of other investigational products in the final stages of clinical trials before they can be evaluated by the FDA as safe and effective therapeutics. As research continues to evolve, so must the oversight structure. Biosafety professionals and IBCs have always played key roles in contributing to the safe, evidence-based advancement of gene therapy research. With the recent regulatory changes and current surge in gene therapy research, the importance of those roles has increased dramatically.


2010 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 41-54 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark H. Lee ◽  
Judith A. Arcidiacono ◽  
Anastacia M. Bilek ◽  
Jeremiah J. Wille ◽  
Caitilin A. Hamill ◽  
...  

2011 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 115-129 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. DEBORAH SHILOFF ◽  
BRYAN MAGWOOD ◽  
KRISZTINA L. MALISZA

The process of research is often lengthy and can be extremely arduous. It may take many years to proceed from the initial development of an idea through to the comparison of the new modalities against a current gold-standard practice. Each step along the way involves rigorous scientific review, where protocols are scrutinized by multiple scientists not only in the specific field at hand but related fields as well. In addition to scientific review, most countries require a further review by a panel that will specifically address the ethics of the proposed research. In Canada, those panels are referred to as Research Ethics Boards (REB), with the United States counterparts known as Institutional Review Boards (IRB).


2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e18501-e18501
Author(s):  
Ryan Huu-Tuan Nguyen ◽  
Yomaira Silva ◽  
Vijayakrishna K. Gadi

e18501 Background: Cancer clinical trials based in the United States (US) have lacked adequate representation of racial and ethnic minorities, the elderly, and women. Pivotal clinical trials leading to United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval are often multi-national trials and may also lack generalizability to underrepresented populations in the United States. We determined the racial, ethnic, age, and sex enrollment in pivotal trials relative to the US cancer population. Methods: We reviewed the FDA’s Drug Approvals and Databases for novel and new use drug approvals for breast, colorectal, lung, and prostate cancer indications from 2008 through 2020. Drugs@FDA was searched for drug approval summaries and FDA labels to identify clinical trials used to justify clinical efficacy that led to FDA approval. For eligible trials, enrollment data were obtained from FDA approval summaries, FDA labels, ClinicalTrials.gov, and corresponding journal manuscripts. Enrollment Fraction (EF) was calculated as enrollment in identified clinical trials divided by 2017 SEER cancer prevalence. All data sources were publicly available. Results: From 2008 through 2020, 60 drugs received novel or new use drug approval for breast, colorectal, lung, or prostate cancer indications based on 66 clinical trials with a total enrollment of 36,830. North America accounted for 9,259 (31%) enrollees of the 73% of trials reporting location of enrollment. Racial demographics were reported in 78% of manuscripts, 66% of ClinicalTrials.gov pages, and 98% of FDA labels or approval summaries. Compared with a 0.4% enrollment fraction among White patients, lower enrollment fractions were noted in Hispanic (0.2%, odds ratio [OR] vs White, 0.46; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.43 to 0.49, P< 0.001) and Black (0.1%, OR 0.29; 95% CI 0.28 to 0.31, P< 0.001) patients. Elderly patients (age ≥ 65 years) were less likely than younger patients to be enrollees (EF 0.3% vs 0.9%, OR 0.27; 95% CI 0.26 to 0.27, P< 0.001) despite accounting for 61.3% of cancer prevalence. For colorectal and lung cancer trials, females were less likely than males (EF 0.7% vs 1.1%, OR 0.66; 95% CI 0.63 to 0.68, P< 0.001) to be enrolled. Conclusions: Black, Hispanic, elderly, and female patients were less likely to enroll in cancer clinical trials leading to FDA approvals from 2008 to 2020. Race and geographic enrollment data were inconsistently reported in journal manuscripts and ClinicalTrials.gov. The lack of appropriate representation of specific patient populations in these key clinical trials limits their generalizability. Future efforts must be made to ensure equitable access, representation, and reporting of enrollees that adequately represent the US population of patients with cancer.


Author(s):  
Rebecca R. Soares ◽  
Devayu Parikh ◽  
Charlotte N. Shields ◽  
Travis Peck ◽  
Anand Gopal ◽  
...  

PEDIATRICS ◽  
1979 ◽  
Vol 64 (1) ◽  
pp. 71-75 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nell J. Ryan ◽  
Gwendolyn R. Hogan ◽  
A. Wallace Hayes ◽  
Peter D. Unger ◽  
Mohamed V. Siraj

Seven cases of Reye's syndrome in which aflatoxin B1 was isolated from the blood or liver or both are presented. In two cases aflatoxin B1 was found in the blood during the acute phase of the disease; a finding not previously reported. In six cases aflatoxin B1 was recovered from autopsy specimens of liver. A number of case reports linking aflatoxin B1 to Reye's syndrome have appeared in the literature but until now only one case has been reported from the United States. Aflatoxin B1 and its possible role in the etiology of Reye's syndrome is discussed. It is concluded that Reye's syndrome is the result of multiple interrelated factors.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document