A checklist for clinical trials in rare disease: obstacles and anticipatory actions—lessons learned from the FOR-DMD trial

Abstract

BackgroundTrials in rare diseases have many challenges, among which are the need to set up multiple sites in different countries to achieve recruitment targets and the divergent landscape of clinical trial regulations in those countries. Over the past years, there have been initiatives to facilitate the process of international study set-up, but the fruits of these deliberations require time to be operationally in place. FOR-DMD (Finding the Optimum Steroid Regimen for Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy) is an academic-led clinical trial which aims to find the optimum steroid regimen for Duchenne muscular dystrophy, funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) for 5 years (July 2010 to June 2015), anticipating that all sites (40 across the USA, Canada, the UK, Germany and Italy) would be open to recruitment from July 2011. However, study start-up was significantly delayed and recruitment did not start until January 2013.MethodThe FOR-DMD study is used as an example to identify systematic problems in the set-up of international, multi-centre clinical trials. The full timeline of the FOR-DMD study, from funding approval to site activation, was collated and reviewed. Systematic issues were identified and grouped into (1) study set-up, e.g. drug procurement; (2) country set-up, e.g. competent authority applications; and (3) site set-up, e.g. contracts, to identify the main causes of delay and suggest areas where anticipatory action could overcome these obstacles in future studies.ResultsTime from the first contact to site activation across countries ranged from 6 to 24 months. Reasons of delay were universal (sponsor agreement, drug procurement, budgetary constraints), country specific (complexity and diversity of regulatory processes, indemnity requirements) and site specific (contracting and approvals). The main identified obstacles included (1) issues related to drug supply, (2) NIH requirements regarding contracting with non-US sites, (3) differing regulatory requirements in the five participating countries, (4) lack of national harmonisation with contracting and the requirement to negotiate terms and contract individually with each site and (5) diversity of languages needed for study materials. Additionally, as with many academic-led studies, the FOR-DMD study did not have access to the infrastructure and expertise that a contracted research organisation could provide, organisations often employed in pharmaceutical-sponsored studies. This delay impacted recruitment, challenged the clinical relevance of the study outcomes and potentially delayed the delivery of the best treatment to patients.ConclusionBased on the FOR-DMD experience, and as an interim solution, we have devised a checklist of steps to not only anticipate and minimise delays in academic international trial initiation but also identify obstacles that will require a concerted effort on the part of many stakeholders to mitigate.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s13063-018-2645-0) contains supplementary material...

Detecting heterogeneity of intervention effects using analysis and meta-analysis of differences in variance between arms of a trial

“…RCTs would need to increase their sample size by orders of magnitude to be powered to detect difference in variance and allow further analysis. This might be prohibitively expensive in time and money, and it may not even be feasible to recruit enough individuals with the required condition to the trial [35]. In this case, as large a sample size as possible is appropriate, and improved reporting, for example, giving detailed summary data across both trial arms, would allow a trial to be included in a meta-analysis using methods we have described here.…”

Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Rare Diseases: Is the Future Brighter?

“…Clinical trials (CTs) are pivotal for therapy development. Nonetheless, only a small fringe of RDs have CTs owing to (i) difficulty in patient identification and recruitment; (ii) challenges associated with data obtention and analysis in small populations; and (iii) lack of reliable biomarkers, among others [64][65][66]. AI may provide solutions for these obstacles of CTs in RDs.…”

Emerging proteomic biomarkers of X-linked muscular dystrophy

“…Currently the feasibility of various innovative therapeutic approaches is tested in preclinical or clinical trials. These new methodologies include stem cell therapy, myoblast transfer, utrophin substitution therapy, enhancement of the cellular stress response, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation and improved steroid therapy, as well as a variety of direct or indirect genetic approaches including plasmid transfer, viral transfer, naked DNA transfer, mini-dystrophin delivery, stop codon read-through therapy, exon-skipping therapy and CRISPR/Cas9-based partial genome editing [22][23][24]. Potentially dangerous side effects due to de novo dystrophin expression following gene therapy were recently highlighted by the immunological evaluation of exon skipping in the mdx mouse [25].…”