» Articles » PMID: 33440429

Leveraging Real-World Data for the Selection of Relevant Eligibility Criteria for the Implementation of Electronic Recruitment Support in Clinical Trials

Overview
Publisher Thieme
Date 2021 Jan 13
PMID 33440429
Citations 12
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Even though clinical trials are indispensable for medical research, they are frequently impaired by delayed or incomplete patient recruitment, resulting in cost overruns or aborted studies. Study protocols based on real-world data with precisely expressed eligibility criteria and realistic cohort estimations are crucial for successful study execution. The increasing availability of routine clinical data in electronic health records (EHRs) provides the opportunity to also support patient recruitment during the prescreening phase. While solutions for electronic recruitment support have been published, to our knowledge, no method for the prioritization of eligibility criteria in this context has been explored.

Methods: In the context of the Electronic Health Records for Clinical Research (EHR4CR) project, we examined the eligibility criteria of the KATHERINE trial. Criteria were extracted from the study protocol, deduplicated, and decomposed. A paper chart review and data warehouse query were executed to retrieve clinical data for the resulting set of simplified criteria separately from both sources. Criteria were scored according to disease specificity, data availability, and discriminatory power based on their content and the clinical dataset.

Results: The study protocol contained 35 eligibility criteria, which after simplification yielded 70 atomic criteria. For a cohort of 106 patients with breast cancer and neoadjuvant treatment, 47.9% of data elements were captured through paper chart review, with the data warehouse query yielding 26.9% of data elements. Score application resulted in a prioritized subset of 17 criteria, which yielded a sensitivity of 1.00 and specificity 0.57 on EHR data (paper charts, 1.00 and 0.80) compared with actual recruitment in the trial.

Conclusion: It is possible to prioritize clinical trial eligibility criteria based on real-world data to optimize prescreening of patients on a selected subset of relevant and available criteria and reduce implementation efforts for recruitment support. The performance could be further improved by increasing EHR data coverage.

Citing Articles

Clinical decision making in prostate cancer care-evaluation of EAU-guidelines use and novel decision support software.

Engesser C, Henkel M, Alargkof V, Fassbind S, Studer J, Engesser J Sci Rep. 2024; 14(1):19113.

PMID: 39155288 PMC: 11330959. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-70292-y.


Enrollment Success, Factors, and Prediction Models in Cancer Trials (2008-2019).

Zhang S, Zhang J, Liu S, Pang H, Stinchcombe T, Wang X JCO Oncol Pract. 2023; 19(11):1058-1068.

PMID: 37793091 PMC: 10667018. DOI: 10.1200/OP.23.00147.


Automatic knowledge extraction from Chinese electronic medical records and rheumatoid arthritis knowledge graph construction.

Liu F, Liu M, Li M, Xin Y, Gao D, Wu J Quant Imaging Med Surg. 2023; 13(6):3873-3890.

PMID: 37284084 PMC: 10240026. DOI: 10.21037/qims-22-1158.


Impacts of Eligibility Criteria on Trial Participants' Age in Alzheimer's Disease Clinical Trials.

Chen A, Li Q, He X, Jaffee M, Hogan W, Wang F AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2023; 2022:368-376.

PMID: 37128470 PMC: 10148327.


A survey of United States adult privacy perspectives and willingness to share real-world data.

Hendricks-Sturrup R, Lu C J Clin Transl Sci. 2023; 7(1):e64.

PMID: 37008612 PMC: 10052457. DOI: 10.1017/cts.2023.4.


References
1.
Bruland P, Forster C, Breil B, Stander S, Dugas M, Fritz F . Does single-source create an added value? Evaluating the impact of introducing x4T into the clinical routine on workflow modifications, data quality and cost-benefit. Int J Med Inform. 2014; 83(12):915-28. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2014.08.007. View

2.
Trinczek B, Kopcke F, Leusch T, Majeed R, Schreiweis B, Wenk J . Design and multicentric implementation of a generic software architecture for patient recruitment systems re-using existing HIS tools and routine patient data. Appl Clin Inform. 2014; 5(1):264-83. PMC: 3974260. DOI: 10.4338/ACI-2013-07-RA-0047. View

3.
Averitt A, Weng C, Ryan P, Perotte A . Translating evidence into practice: eligibility criteria fail to eliminate clinically significant differences between real-world and study populations. NPJ Digit Med. 2020; 3:67. PMC: 7214444. DOI: 10.1038/s41746-020-0277-8. View

4.
Kopcke F, Kraus S, Scholler A, Nau C, Schuttler J, Prokosch H . Secondary use of routinely collected patient data in a clinical trial: an evaluation of the effects on patient recruitment and data acquisition. Int J Med Inform. 2012; 82(3):185-92. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2012.11.008. View

5.
Lobe M, Staubert S, Goldberg C, Haffner I, Winter A . Towards Phenotyping of Clinical Trial Eligibility Criteria. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2018; 248:293-299. View