» Articles » PMID: 21952064

The Prevalence and Economic Impact of Low-enrolling Clinical Studies at an Academic Medical Center

Overview
Journal Acad Med
Specialty Medical Education
Date 2011 Sep 29
PMID 21952064
Citations 68
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Purpose: The authors assessed the prevalence and associated economic impact of low-enrolling clinical studies at a single academic medical center.

Method: The authors examined all clinical studies receiving institutional review board (IRB) review between FY2006 and FY2009 at Oregon Health & Science University (OHSU) for recruitment performance and analyzed them by type of IRB review (full-board, exempt, expedited), funding mechanism, and academic unit. A low-enrolling study included those with zero or one participant at the time of study termination. The authors calculated the costs associated with IRB review, financial setup, contract negotiation, and department study start-up activities and the total economic impact on OHSU of low-enrolling studies for FY2009.

Results: A total of 837 clinical studies were terminated during the study period, 260 (31.1%) of which were low-enrolling. A greater proportion of low-enrolling studies were government funded than industry funded (P=.006). The authors found significant differences among the various academic units with respect to percentages of low-enrolling studies (from 10% to 67%). The uncompensated economic impact of low-enrolling studies was conservatively estimated to be nearly $1 million for FY2009.

Conclusions: A substantial proportion of clinical studies incurred high institutional and departmental expense but resulted in little scientific benefit. Although a certain percentage of low-enrolling studies can be expected in any research organization, the overall number of such studies must be managed to reduce the aggregate costs of conducting research and to maximize research opportunities. Effective, proactive interventions are needed to address the prevalence and impact of low enrollment.

Citing Articles

Returning individual research results to participants: Values, preferences, and expectations.

Kent D, Villegas-Downs M, Rios M, Freedman M, Krishnan J, Menchaca M J Clin Transl Sci. 2024; 8(1):e126.

PMID: 39345708 PMC: 11428116. DOI: 10.1017/cts.2024.568.


What Is Ailing Oncology Clinical Trials? Can We Fix Them?.

Mittal A, Moore S, Navani V, Jiang D, Stewart D, Liu G Curr Oncol. 2024; 31(7):3738-3751.

PMID: 39057147 PMC: 11276279. DOI: 10.3390/curroncol31070275.


Oncologist-Reported Barriers and Facilitators to Offering Cancer Clinical Trials to Their Patients.

Castillo B, Boehmer L, Schrag J, Howson A, Oyer R, Pierce L Curr Oncol. 2024; 31(6):3017-3029.

PMID: 38920714 PMC: 11202609. DOI: 10.3390/curroncol31060230.


Evidence-based recruitment strategies for clinical research: Study personnel's and research participants' perceptions about successful methods of outreach for a U.S. Autism-Research Cohort.

Goin-Kochel R, Lozano I, Duhon G, Marzano G, Daniels A, Law J J Clin Transl Sci. 2024; 8(1):e65.

PMID: 38690223 PMC: 11058577. DOI: 10.1017/cts.2024.512.


Undertaking Studies Within A Trial to evaluate recruitment and retention strategies for randomised controlled trials: lessons learnt from the PROMETHEUS research programme.

Parker A, Arundel C, Clark L, Coleman E, Doherty L, Hewitt C Health Technol Assess. 2024; 28(2):1-114.

PMID: 38327177 PMC: 11017159. DOI: 10.3310/HTQW3107.


References
1.
Schroen A, Petroni G, Wang H, Gray R, Wang X, Cronin W . Preliminary evaluation of factors associated with premature trial closure and feasibility of accrual benchmarks in phase III oncology trials. Clin Trials. 2010; 7(4):312-21. PMC: 3977321. DOI: 10.1177/1740774510374973. View

2.
Kassirer J . Academic medical centers under siege. N Engl J Med. 1994; 331(20):1370-1. DOI: 10.1056/NEJM199411173312010. View

3.
Cheng S, Dietrich M, Dilts D . A sense of urgency: Evaluating the link between clinical trial development time and the accrual performance of cancer therapy evaluation program (NCI-CTEP) sponsored studies. Clin Cancer Res. 2010; 16(22):5557-63. PMC: 3050630. DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-10-0133. View

4.
Pober J, Neuhauser C, Pober J . Obstacles facing translational research in academic medical centers. FASEB J. 2001; 15(13):2303-13. DOI: 10.1096/fj.01-0540lsf. View

5.
Dilts D, Cheng S, Crites J, Sandler A, Doroshow J . Phase III clinical trial development: a process of chutes and ladders. Clin Cancer Res. 2010; 16(22):5381-9. PMC: 3058405. DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-10-1273. View