| 1. |
- Capodanno, Davide, et al.
(author)
-
Trial Design Principles for Patients a High Bleeding Risk Undergoing PCI JACC Scientific Expert Panel
- 2020
-
In: Journal of the American College of Cardiology. - : ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC. - 0735-1097 .- 1558-3597. ; 76:12, s. 1468-1483
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)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. |
- Jackson, Kevin, et al.
(author)
-
Antithrombotic drug development for atrial fibrillation : proceedings, Washington, DC, July 25-27, 2005
- 2008
-
In: American Heart Journal. - : Elsevier BV. - 0002-8703 .- 1097-6744. ; 155:5, s. 829-40
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- In July 2005, leaders from academia, government, and industry convened in Washington, DC, to discuss key issues in the development of antithrombotic treatments for atrial fibrillation (AF). In addition to summarizing available data on the relative benefits and risks of currently available therapies in diverse clinical practice settings, we reviewed designs of ongoing trials and registries, focusing on areas of methodological controversy and uncertainty. Participants in this meeting described the growing burden of AF, summarized the data showing effectiveness of warfarin for prevention of stroke in AF, and noted that warfarin is both underused and poorly monitored and adjusted in general practice. There was consensus that there is an important unmet clinical need for better treatment of patients with AF at risk of stroke, including alternatives to warfarin that address its limitations. Comparative noninferiority trials to develop alternatives to warfarin must include warfarin management that is at least as good as that provided in historical trials. There was agreement that noninferiority trials can be done based on historical warfarin trials, and that placebo-controlled trials focused on patients not receiving warfarin in general practice can provide important information as well. Statistical principles for noninferiority in this setting were discussed, and a standard approach was proposed. A majority of clinical trial representatives suggested that large, simple, open-label trials would provide the most meaningful information relevant to future practice, but regulators cautioned that, in such a simple trial, one needs to ensure that the control group does at least as well as the historical controls for the noninferiority design to be interpretable. With this summary document, we hope to provide a helpful resource for future drug development for AF.
|
|
| 3. |
- Olivier, Cecille, et al.
(author)
-
New strategies for the conduct of clinical trials in paediatric Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension (PAH): Outcome of a multi-stakeholder meeting with patients, academia, industry and regulators held at EMA on Monday 12th June 2017
- 2019
-
In: Journal of the American Heart Association. - 2047-9980. ; 8:10, s. 1-10
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Aims: Drug development for paediatric pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) ispressingly needed. Experts from the US Food and Drug Administration, EuropeanMedicines Agency, Health Canada, key opinion leaders, academia, patients, and industry representatives held a workshop on 12th June 2017 dedicated to addressing challenges and unmet needs. This report summarises the approaches proposed during the meeting to address key issues in extrapolation, trial design, and study endpoints in pediatric drug development.Methods and Results: A pre-workshop stakeholder survey was conducted and showed that most respondents believe the pathophysiology of heritable PAH and some forms of idiopathic PAH is thought to be sufficiently similar in adult and paediatric patients, although the clinical manifestations may differ. In this situation, placebo-controlled trials might not be required to confirm clinical benefit in paediatrics. The study endpoints used to support drug approvals in adults were reviewed to determine if these existing study endpoints can be applied in paediatric PAH efficacy trials. It showed that non-invasive study endpoints, such as the time to clinical worsening, WHO functionalclass, and 6-Minute-Walk-Test could be applicable in paediatric PAH trials, although each presents some limitations in paediatrics.Conclusion: Extrapolation of efficacy from informative adult studies may be appropriate in some forms of PAH. Initial dose-finding studies and exposure-response modelling are warranted in paediatric PAH, followed by an efficacy and safety study to explore the response to treatment and exposure-response relationship. A novel, non-invasive, developmentally-appropriate, and reliable study endpoint needs to be developed.
|
|
| 4. |
- Raman, Sudha R., et al.
(author)
-
Leveraging electronic health records for clinical research
- 2018
-
In: American Heart Journal. - : Elsevier. - 0002-8703 .- 1097-6744. ; 202, s. 13-19
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Electronic health records (EHRs) can be a major tool in the quest to decrease costs and timelines of clinical trial research, generate better evidence for clinical decision making, and advance health care. Over the past decade, EHRs have increasingly offered opportunities to speed up, streamline, and enhance clinical research. EHRs offer a wide range of possible uses in clinical trials, including assisting with prestudy feasibility assessment, patient recruitment, and data capture in care delivery. To fully appreciate these opportunities, health care stakeholders must come together to face critical challenges in leveraging EHR data, including data quality/completeness, information security, stakeholder engagement, and increasing the scale of research infrastructure and related governance. Leaders from academia, government, industry, and professional societies representing patient, provider, researcher, industry, and regulator perspectives convened the Leveraging EHR for Clinical Research Now! Think Tank in Washington, DC (February 18-19, 2016), to identify barriers to using EHRs in clinical research and to generate potential solutions. Think tank members identified a broad range of issues surrounding the use of EHRs in research and proposed a variety of solutions. Recognizing the challenges, the participants identified the urgent need to look more deeply at previous efforts to use these data, share lessons learned, and develop a multidisciplinary agenda for best practices for using EHRs in clinical research. We report the proceedings from this think tank meeting in the following paper. (C) 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
|
|
| 5. |
- Urban, Philip, et al.
(author)
-
Defining High Bleeding Risk in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention : A Consensus Document From the Academic Research Consortium for High Bleeding Risk
- 2019
-
In: Circulation. - : LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS. - 0009-7322 .- 1524-4539. ; 140:3, s. 240-261
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)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.
|
|
| 6. |
- Urban, Philip, et al.
(author)
-
Defining high bleeding risk in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention : a consensus document from the Academic Research Consortium for High Bleeding Risk
- 2019
-
In: European Heart Journal. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0195-668X .- 1522-9645. ; 40:31, s. 2632-2653
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)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.
|
|
