Leveraging real-world data for the selection of relevant eligibility criteria for the implementation of electronic recruitment support in clinical trials

• Verfasst von: Melzer, Georg [VerfasserIn]
• Verfasst von: Maiwald, Tim [VerfasserIn]
• Verfasst von: Prokosch, Hans-Ulrich [VerfasserIn]
• Verfasst von: Ganslandt, Thomas [VerfasserIn]
• Titel: Leveraging real-world data for the selection of relevant eligibility criteria for the implementation of electronic recruitment support in clinical trials
• Verf.angabe: Georg Melzer, Tim Maiwald, Hans-Ulrich Prokosch, Thomas Ganslandt
• Jahr: 2021
• Umfang: 10 S.
• Fussnoten: Gesehen am 12.05.2021
• Titel Quelle: Enthalten in: Applied clinical informatics
• Ort Quelle: Stuttgart : Schattauer, 2010
• Jahr Quelle: 2021
• Band/Heft Quelle: 12(2021), 01, Seite 17-26
• ISSN Quelle: 1869-0327
• DOI: doi:10.1055/s-0040-1721010
• Datenträger: Online-Ressource
• Sprache: eng
• K10plus-PPN: 1757720030

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.