How the COVID-19 pandemic is changing clinical trial conduct and driving innovation in bioanalysis

Thousands of clinical trials all over the world were stopped, disrupted or delayed while countries grappled to contain the pandemic and research resources were redeployed. The long-term effects of the turbulence caused by the pandemic have yet to be fully understood, but it should already be clear that the increased focus on participant needs and on the logistical challenges of current models are not likely to fade away quickly. This disruption is opening doors for rethinking traditional approaches to clinical trial conduct – including decentralizing site visits, introducing new methods of sample collection, rethinking matrix selection, reducing sample volumes and collaborating on device development. These approaches reduce participant burden while improving critical trial data.

Conducting clinical trials during the COVID-19 pandemic—a collaborative trial network response

The unprecedented demand placed on healthcare systems from the COVID-19 pandemic has forced a reassessment of clinical trial conduct and feasibility. Consequently, the Australasian Kidney Trials Network (AKTN), an established collaborative research group known for conducting investigator-initiated global clinical trials, had to efficiently respond and adapt to the changing landscape during COVID-19. Key priorities included ensuring patient and staff safety, trial integrity and network sustainability for the kidney care community. New resources have been developed to enable a structured review and contingency plan of trial activities during the pandemic and beyond.

Optimizing eligibility criteria and clinical trial conduct to enhance clinical trial participation for primary brain tumor patients

Building on an initiative to enhance clinical trial participation involving the Society for Neuro-Oncology, the Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology Working Group, patient advocacy groups, clinical trial cooperative groups, and other partners, we evaluate the impact of eligibility criteria and trial conduct on neuro-oncology clinical trial participation. Clinical trials often carry forward eligibility criteria from prior studies that may be overly restrictive and unnecessary and needlessly limit patient accrual. Inclusion and exclusion criteria should be evaluated based on the goals and design of the study and whether they impact patient safety and/or treatment efficacy. In addition, we evaluate clinical trial conduct as a barrier to accrual and discuss strategies to minimize such barriers for neuro-oncology trials.

Strategies for developing sustainable health research capacity in low and middle-income countries: a prospective, qualitative study investigating the barriers and enablers to locally led clinical trial conduct in Ethiopia, Cameroon and Sri Lanka

ObjectivesIn 2013, the WHO stated that unless low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) become producers of research, health goals would be hard to achieve. Among the capacities required to build a local evidence base, ability to conduct clinical trials is important. There is no evidence-based guidance for the best ways to develop locally led trial capacity. This research aims to identify the barriers and enablers to locally led clinical trial conduct in LMICs and determine strategies for their sustainable development.DesignProspective, multiple case study design consisting of interviews (n=34), focus group discussions (n=13) and process mapping exercises (n=10).SettingCase studies took place in Ethiopia (2011), Cameroon (2012) and Sri Lanka (2013).ParticipantsLocal health researchers with previous experiences of clinical trials or stakeholders with an interest in trials were purposively selected through registration searches and snowball sampling (n=100).Primary and secondary outcome measuresDiscussion notes and transcripts were analysed using thematic coding analysis. Key themes and mechanisms were identified.ResultsInstitutions and individuals were variably successful at conducting trials, but there were strong commonalities in the barriers and enablers across all levels and functions of the research systems. Transferable mechanisms were summarised into the necessary conditions for trial undertaking, which included: awareness of research, motivation, knowledge and technical skills, leadership capabilities, forming collaborations, inclusive trial operations, policy relevance and uptake and macro and institutional strengthening.ConclusionsBarriers and enablers to locally led trial undertaking exist at all levels and functions of LMIC research systems. Establishing the necessary conditions to facilitate this research will require multiple, coordinated interventions that seek to resolve them in a systemic manner. The strategies presented in the discussion provide an evidence-based framework for a self-sustaining capacity development approach. This represents an important contribution to the literature that will be relevant for research funders, users and producers.