Cargando…
Guarding the Gate: Remote Structured Assessments to Enhance Enrollment Precision in Depression Trials
BACKGROUND: Failed treatment trials are common in major depressive disorder and treatment-resistant depression, and remotely performed multifaceted, centralized structured interviews can potentially enhance signal detection by ensuring that enrolled patients meet eligibility criteria. METHODS: We as...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5325248/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28187008 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/JCP.0000000000000669 |
_version_ | 1782510344357281792 |
---|---|
author | Freeman, Marlene P. Pooley, James Flynn, Martina J. Baer, Lee Mischoulon, David Mou, David Fava, Maurizio |
author_facet | Freeman, Marlene P. Pooley, James Flynn, Martina J. Baer, Lee Mischoulon, David Mou, David Fava, Maurizio |
author_sort | Freeman, Marlene P. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Failed treatment trials are common in major depressive disorder and treatment-resistant depression, and remotely performed multifaceted, centralized structured interviews can potentially enhance signal detection by ensuring that enrolled patients meet eligibility criteria. METHODS: We assessed the use of a specific remote structured interview that validated the diagnosis, level of treatment resistance, and depression severity. The objectives were to (1) assess the rate at which patients who were deemed eligible for participation in trials by site investigators were ineligible, (2) assess the reasons for ineligibility, (3) compare rates of ineligibility between academic and nonacademic sites, (4) compare eligibility between US and non-US sites, and (5) report the placebo response rates in trials utilizing this quality assurance approach, comparing its placebo response rates with those reported in the literature. Methods included a pooled analysis of 9 studies that utilized this methodology (SAFER interviews). RESULTS: Overall, 15.33% of patients who had been deemed eligible at research sites were not eligible after the structured interviews. The most common reason was that patients did not meet the study requirements for level of treatment resistance. Pass rates were significantly higher at non-US compared with US sites (94.6% vs 83.3%, respectively; P < 0.001). There was not a significant difference between academic and nonacademic sites (87.8% vs 82.4%; P = 0.08). Placebo response rates were 13.0% to 27.3%, below the 30% to 40% average in antidepressant clinical trials, suggesting a benefit of the quality assurance provided by these interviews. CONCLUSIONS: The use of a remotely structured interview by experienced clinical researchers was feasible and possibly contributed to lower-than-average placebo response rates. The difference between US and non-US sites should be the subject of further research. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5325248 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-53252482017-03-08 Guarding the Gate: Remote Structured Assessments to Enhance Enrollment Precision in Depression Trials Freeman, Marlene P. Pooley, James Flynn, Martina J. Baer, Lee Mischoulon, David Mou, David Fava, Maurizio J Clin Psychopharmacol Original Contributions BACKGROUND: Failed treatment trials are common in major depressive disorder and treatment-resistant depression, and remotely performed multifaceted, centralized structured interviews can potentially enhance signal detection by ensuring that enrolled patients meet eligibility criteria. METHODS: We assessed the use of a specific remote structured interview that validated the diagnosis, level of treatment resistance, and depression severity. The objectives were to (1) assess the rate at which patients who were deemed eligible for participation in trials by site investigators were ineligible, (2) assess the reasons for ineligibility, (3) compare rates of ineligibility between academic and nonacademic sites, (4) compare eligibility between US and non-US sites, and (5) report the placebo response rates in trials utilizing this quality assurance approach, comparing its placebo response rates with those reported in the literature. Methods included a pooled analysis of 9 studies that utilized this methodology (SAFER interviews). RESULTS: Overall, 15.33% of patients who had been deemed eligible at research sites were not eligible after the structured interviews. The most common reason was that patients did not meet the study requirements for level of treatment resistance. Pass rates were significantly higher at non-US compared with US sites (94.6% vs 83.3%, respectively; P < 0.001). There was not a significant difference between academic and nonacademic sites (87.8% vs 82.4%; P = 0.08). Placebo response rates were 13.0% to 27.3%, below the 30% to 40% average in antidepressant clinical trials, suggesting a benefit of the quality assurance provided by these interviews. CONCLUSIONS: The use of a remotely structured interview by experienced clinical researchers was feasible and possibly contributed to lower-than-average placebo response rates. The difference between US and non-US sites should be the subject of further research. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2017-04 2017-02-10 /pmc/articles/PMC5325248/ /pubmed/28187008 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/JCP.0000000000000669 Text en Copyright © 2017 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CCBY-NC-ND) (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) , where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal. |
spellingShingle | Original Contributions Freeman, Marlene P. Pooley, James Flynn, Martina J. Baer, Lee Mischoulon, David Mou, David Fava, Maurizio Guarding the Gate: Remote Structured Assessments to Enhance Enrollment Precision in Depression Trials |
title | Guarding the Gate: Remote Structured Assessments to Enhance Enrollment Precision in Depression Trials |
title_full | Guarding the Gate: Remote Structured Assessments to Enhance Enrollment Precision in Depression Trials |
title_fullStr | Guarding the Gate: Remote Structured Assessments to Enhance Enrollment Precision in Depression Trials |
title_full_unstemmed | Guarding the Gate: Remote Structured Assessments to Enhance Enrollment Precision in Depression Trials |
title_short | Guarding the Gate: Remote Structured Assessments to Enhance Enrollment Precision in Depression Trials |
title_sort | guarding the gate: remote structured assessments to enhance enrollment precision in depression trials |
topic | Original Contributions |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5325248/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28187008 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/JCP.0000000000000669 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT freemanmarlenep guardingthegateremotestructuredassessmentstoenhanceenrollmentprecisionindepressiontrials AT pooleyjames guardingthegateremotestructuredassessmentstoenhanceenrollmentprecisionindepressiontrials AT flynnmartinaj guardingthegateremotestructuredassessmentstoenhanceenrollmentprecisionindepressiontrials AT baerlee guardingthegateremotestructuredassessmentstoenhanceenrollmentprecisionindepressiontrials AT mischoulondavid guardingthegateremotestructuredassessmentstoenhanceenrollmentprecisionindepressiontrials AT moudavid guardingthegateremotestructuredassessmentstoenhanceenrollmentprecisionindepressiontrials AT favamaurizio guardingthegateremotestructuredassessmentstoenhanceenrollmentprecisionindepressiontrials |