Contemporary strategies to improve clinical trial design for critical care research: insights from the First Critical Care Clinical Trialists Workshop

Abstract

Background: Conducting research in critically-ill patient populations is challenging, and most randomized trials of critically-ill patients have not achieved pre-specified statistical thresholds to conclude that the intervention being investigated was beneficial. Methods: In 2019, a diverse group of patient representatives, regulators from the USA and European Union, federal grant managers, industry representatives, clinical trialists, epidemiologists, and clinicians convened the First Critical Care Clinical Trialists (3CT) Workshop to discuss challenges and opportunities in conducting and assessing critical care trials. Herein, we present the advantages and disadvantages of available methodologies for clinical trial design, conduct, and analysis, and a series of recommendations to potentially improve future trials in critical care. Conclusion: The 3CT Workshop participants identified opportunities to improve critical care trials using strategies to optimize sample size calculations, account for patient and disease heterogeneity, increase the efficiency of trial conduct, maximize the use of trial data, and to refine and standardize the collection of patient-centered and patientinformed outcome measures beyond mortality.

Inhibition of circulating dipeptidyl-peptidase 3 restores cardiac function in a sepsis-induced model in rats: A proof of concept study

“…Our study extends the role of cDPP3 to septic cardiomyopathy. Additionally, inhibition of high levels of cDPP3 by PCZ in septic rats restored cardiac contraction and improved survival, suggesting PCZ as a possible therapeutic option in patients with septic shock, an indication where limited treatment efficacy has been observed [29]. The use of PCZ could possibly limit the use of high doses of inotropes during septic shock treatment, which has been associated with deleterious effects [30,31].…”

Dexamethasone in hospitalised patients with COVID-19: addressing uncertainties

“…Because COVID-19 and classical ARDS have considerable heterogeneity, future trials should incorporate plans for both understanding heterogeneity and prospectively identifying treatment-responsive subgroups of patients. 15 …”

Designing an ARDS trial for 2020 and beyond: focus on enrichment strategies

“…Bedside measurement of plasma levels of IL-8, Protein C, and bicarbonate to identify a hyperinflammatory phenotype could potentially identify ARDS patients with higher mortality [ 3 ] as does a whole blood gene expression signature in pediatric sepsis [ 4 ]. Various ICU risk scores have been tested unsuccessfully because they are not specific for ARDS and other clinical syndromes and because patients at the highest risk may not benefit from therapy [ 5 ].…”