| 1. |
- Capodanno, Davide, et al.
(författare)
-
Trial Design Principles for Patients a High Bleeding Risk Undergoing PCI JACC Scientific Expert Panel
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Journal of the American College of Cardiology. - : ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC. - 0735-1097 .- 1558-3597. ; 76:12, s. 1468-1483
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Investigating the balance of risk for thrombotic and bleeding events after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is especially relevant for patients at high bleeding risk (HBR). The Academic Research Consortium for HBR recently proposed a consensus definition in an effort to standardize the patient population included in HBR trials. The aim of this consensus-based document, the second initiative from the Academic Research Consortium for HBR, is to propose recommendations to guide the design of clinical trials of devices and drugs in HBR patients undergoing PCI. The authors discuss the designs of trials in HBR patients undergoing PCI and various aspects of trial design specific to HBR patients, including target populations, intervention and control groups, primary and secondary outcomes, and timing of endpoint reporting. (C) 2020 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation.
|
|
| 2. |
- Hahn, Rebecca T, et al.
(författare)
-
Tricuspid Valve Academic Research Consortium Definitions for Tricuspid Regurgitation and Trial Endpoints.
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Journal of the American College of Cardiology. - 1558-3597.
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Interest in the pathophysiology, etiology, management, and outcomes of patients with tricuspid regurgitation (TR) has grown in the wake of multiple natural history studies showing progressively worse outcomes associated with increasing TR severity, even after adjusting for multiple comorbidities. Historically, isolated tricuspid valve surgery has been associated with high in-hospital mortality rates, leading to the development of transcatheter treatment options. The aim of this first Tricuspid Valve Academic Research Consortium document is to standardize definitions of disease etiology and severity, as well as endpoints for trials that aim to address the gaps in our knowledge related to identification and management of patients with TR. Standardizing endpoints for trials should provide consistency and enable meaningful comparisons between clinical trials. A second Tricuspid Valve Academic Research Consortium document will focus on further defining trial endpoints and will discuss trial design options.
|
|
| 3. |
- Hahn, Rebecca T, et al.
(författare)
-
Tricuspid Valve Academic Research Consortium Definitions for Tricuspid Regurgitation and Trial Endpoints.
- 2023
-
Ingår i: The Annals of thoracic surgery. - 1552-6259.
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Interest in the pathophysiology, etiology, management, and outcomes of patients with tricuspid regurgitation (TR) has grown in the wake of multiple natural history studies showing progressively worse outcomes associated with increasing TR severity, even after adjusting for multiple comorbidities. Historically, isolated tricuspid valve surgery has been associated with high in-hospital mortality rates, leading to the development of transcatheter treatment options. The aim of this first Tricuspid Valve Academic Research Consortium document is to standardize definitions of disease etiology and severity, as well as endpoints for trials that aim to address the gaps in our knowledge related to identification and management of patients with TR. Standardizing endpoints for trials should provide consistency and enable meaningful comparisons between clinical trials. A second Tricuspid Valve Academic Research Consortium document will focus on further defining trial endpoints and will discuss trial design options.
|
|
| 4. |
- Hahn, Rebecca T, et al.
(författare)
-
Tricuspid Valve Academic Research Consortium Definitions for Tricuspid Regurgitation and Trial Endpoints.
- 2023
-
Ingår i: European heart journal. - 1522-9645.
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Interest in the pathophysiology, etiology, management, and outcomes of patients with tricuspid regurgitation (TR) has grown in the wake of multiple natural history studies showing progressively worse outcomes associated with increasing TR severity, even after adjusting for multiple comorbidities. Historically, isolated tricuspid valve surgery has been associated with high in-hospital mortality rates, leading to the development of transcatheter treatment options. The aim of this first Tricuspid Valve Academic Research Consortium document is to standardize definitions of disease etiology and severity, as well as endpoints for trials that aim to address the gaps in our knowledge related to identification and management of patients with TR. Standardizing endpoints for trials should provide consistency and enable meaningful comparisons between clinical trials. A second Tricuspid Valve Academic Research Consortium document will focus on further defining trial endpoints and will discuss trial design options.
|
|
| 5. |
- Sharma, Abhinav, et al.
(författare)
-
Clinical Events Classification (CEC) in Clinical Trials : Report on the Current Landscape and Future Directions - Proceedings from the CEC Summit 2018
- 2022
-
Ingår i: American Heart Journal. - : Elsevier. - 0002-8703 .- 1097-6744. ; 246, s. 93-104
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Importance: Clinical events adjudication is pivotal for generating consistent and comparable evidence in clinical trials. The methodology of event adjudication is evolving, but research is needed to develop best practices and spur innovation.Observations: A meeting of stakeholders from regulatory agencies, academic and contract research organizations, pharmaceutical and device companies, and clinical trialists convened in Chicago, IL, for Clinical Events Classification (CEC) Summit 2018 to discuss key topics and future directions. Formal studies are lacking on strategies to optimize CEC conduct, improve efficiency, minimize cost, and generally increase the speed and accuracy of the event adjudication process. Major challenges to CEC discussed included ensuring rigorous quality of the process, identifying safety events, standardizing event definitions, using uniform strategies for missing information, facilitating interactions between CEC members and other trial leadership, and determining the CEC's role in pragmatic trials or trials using real-world data. Consensus recommendations from the meeting include the following: 1) ensure an adequate adjudication infrastructure; 2) use negatively adjudicated events to identify important safety events reported only outside the scope of the primary endpoint; 3) conduct further research in the use of artificial intelligence and digital/mobile technologies to streamline adjudication processes; and 4) emphasize the importance of standardizing event definitions and quality metrics of CEC programs.Conclusions and Relevance: As novel strategies for clinical trials emerge to generate evidence for regulatory approval and to guide clinical practice, a greater understanding of the role of the CEC process will be critical to optimize trial conduct and increase confidence in the data generated.
|
|
| 6. |
- Spitzer, Ernest, et al.
(författare)
-
Critical Appraisal of Contemporary Clinical Endpoint Definitions in Coronary Intervention Trials A Guidance Document
- 2019
-
Ingår i: JACC. - : Elsevier. - 1936-8798 .- 1876-7605. ; 12:9, s. 805-819
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- The Academic Research Consortium (ARC) and the Standardized Data Collection for Cardiovascular Trials Initiative have recently published updated clinical and angiographic endpoint definitions for percutaneous coronary intervention trials. The aim of this document is to provide practical guidance to facilitate and harmonize the implementation of those definitions in randomized trials or registries, as well as to foster consistency among independent adjudication committees. The authors compared the ARC-2 and Standardized Data Collection for Cardiovascular Trials Initiative definitions to identify areas of consistency, complex scenarios, and definitions in need of further standardization. Furthermore, the authors compared the fourth universal definition of myocardial infarction with the ARC-2 definition of myocardial infarction. The Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions definition of periprocedural myocardial infarction was also compared with the ARC-2 definition and the fourth universal definition of myocardial infarction. An in-depth assessment was done for each individual clinical endpoint to guide clinical investigators on reporting and classifying clinical adverse events. Finally, the authors propose standard streamlined data capture templates for reporting and adjudicating death, myocardial infarction, stroke, revascularization, stent or scaffold thrombosis, and bleeding. (c) 2019 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation.
|
|
| 7. |
- Spitzer, Ernest, et al.
(författare)
-
Independence of clinical events committees : A consensus statement from clinical research organizations
- 2022
-
Ingår i: American Heart Journal. - : Elsevier. - 0002-8703 .- 1097-6744. ; 248, s. 120-129
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background Randomized clinical trials are the gold standard to assess the causal relationship between an intervention and subsequent outcomes, also known as clinical endpoints. In order to limit bias, central clinical events committees (CEC) are established to ensure consistent event reporting across participating centers, as well as complete and accurate ascertainment of endpoints. However, defining independence is challenging.Methods This consensus statement was generated by teleconferences and electronic communications among clinical research organizations from the United States, Europe and Australia. This document does not constitute regulatory guidance.Results An independent CEC is defined when the adjudicators are not primarily involved in designing, funding, sponsoring, organizing, conducting, analyzing or regulating the clinical trial for which they serve as an adjudicator, beyond their role as CEC member. Moreover, independence requires absence of conflicts of interest with the steering committee, sponsor, grant giver, manufacturer, coordinating center, other independent committees, core laboratories, medical monitor, safety physician, participating clinical sites, statistician or data manager, regulatory agencies or authorities, which could influence (or be perceived to influence) a member's objectivity in evaluating trial data. Such conflicts of interest include financial benefits, directing or advisory role (paid or unpaid), decision-making position, as well as being a direct relative. An independent adjudicator has no other role within a clinical trial.Conclusions This consensus statement presents a standardized definition of an independent CEC to be considered by clinical research organizations, manufacturers, and investigators. In addition, it provides recommendations on best practices for implementation of an independent CEC.
|
|
| 8. |
- Urban, Philip, et al.
(författare)
-
Defining High Bleeding Risk in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention : A Consensus Document From the Academic Research Consortium for High Bleeding Risk
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Circulation. - : LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS. - 0009-7322 .- 1524-4539. ; 140:3, s. 240-261
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Identification and management of patients at high bleeding risk undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention are of major importance, but a lack of standardization in defining this population limits trial design, data interpretation, and clinical decision-making. The Academic Research Consortium for High Bleeding Risk (ARC-HBR) is a collaboration among leading research organizations, regulatory authorities, and physician-scientists from the United States, Asia, and Europe focusing on percutaneous coronary intervention-related bleeding. Two meetings of the 31-member consortium were held in Washington, DC, in April 2018 and in Paris, France, in October 2018. These meetings were organized by the Cardiovascular European Research Center on behalf of the ARC-HBR group and included representatives of the US Food and Drug Administration and the Japanese Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency, as well as observers from the pharmaceutical and medical device industries. A consensus definition of patients at high bleeding risk was developed that was based on review of the available evidence. The definition is intended to provide consistency in defining this population for clinical trials and to complement clinical decision-making and regulatory review. The proposed ARC-HBR consensus document represents the first pragmatic approach to a consistent definition of high bleeding risk in clinical trials evaluating the safety and effectiveness of devices and drug regimens for patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.
|
|
| 9. |
- Urban, Philip, et al.
(författare)
-
Defining high bleeding risk in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention : a consensus document from the Academic Research Consortium for High Bleeding Risk
- 2019
-
Ingår i: European Heart Journal. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0195-668X .- 1522-9645. ; 40:31, s. 2632-2653
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Identification and management of patients at high bleeding risk undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention are of major importance, but a lack of standardization in defining this population limits trial design, data interpretation, and clinical decision-making. The Academic Research Consortium for High Bleeding Risk (ARC-HBR) is a collaboration among leading research organizations, regulatory authorities, and physician-scientists from the United States, Asia, and Europe focusing on percutaneous coronary intervention-related bleeding. Two meetings of the 31-member consortium were held in Washington, DC, in April 2018 and in Paris, France, in October 2018. These meetings were organized by the Cardiovascular European Research Center on behalf of the ARC-HBR group and included representatives of the US Food and Drug Administration and the Japanese Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency, as well as observers from the pharmaceutical and medical device industries. A consensus definition of patients at high bleeding risk was developed that was based on review of the available evidence. The definition is intended to provide consistency in defining this population for clinical trials and to complement clinical decision-making and regulatory review. The proposed ARC-HBR consensus document represents the first pragmatic approach to a consistent definition of high bleeding risk in clinical trials evaluating the safety and effectiveness of devices and drug regimens for patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.
|
|
