3080 Ensuring Quality in Investigator-Initiated Clinical Trials through Monitoring Concepts Training

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: Because clinical trial results are instrumental in the approval of a new drug or changes to the practice of medicine, ensuring the accuracy and validity of collected data is critical in the clinical trial process. This function, routinely carried out by clinical trial monitors in industry-sponsored trials, is often lacking in investigator-initiated trials (IITs) conducted in academia. To address this challenge, we have developed a self-study module that can be used to cross-train academic researchers in essential concepts and practical approaches to monitoring. Furthermore, we are applying a framework drawn from implementation science in the development and launch of this initiative. This framework, as used in other educational programs, is employed here to close the gap between initiative and practice, thereby effectively disseminating this training would improve the quality of clinical trials in academia. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: This research project applied exploration, installation and implementation stages of the implementation science process by 1) exploring the need for a new initiative, 2) disseminating results, 3) engaging stakeholders, 4) creating standard operating procedures (SOPs) for installation and implementation, 5) studying user satisfaction and effectiveness, 6) addressing feedback and 7) conducting implementation. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: From literature review and internet searches we determined that although numerous GCP training resources exist, most are too broad and lack the practical approaches to meet the complex requirements of monitoring. Moreover, most of the offerings identified are costly or inaccessible. With only about 65% of IITs reported as being monitored (Figures 1 and 2), it appears that there is a clear need for training tools that are easily available to a broader audience. And because monitoring skills are substantially different from those associated with research coordination, it is not surprising that research professionals believed that they would need additional training to become proficient. To address this need, we began developing a monitoring module. We engaged key stakeholders from academia and industry to gain insights into their needs. The results indicated that although our training module was effective, supplementary information on the fundamentals of clinical trials should be included for those new to the field. After incorporating suggested changes and completing the module, we conducted user testing to determine if our module is ready to be broadly disseminated (Figures 3 and 4). Following positive feedback from the group, we are currently in the process of disseminating our module and studying its impact. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: IITs are instrumental in translating academic research into product development. Deficiencies in the quality control of these trials can lead to inadequacies in data accuracy and validity that could lead to significant delays in bringing innovative therapies to patients. Recent NIH policies require data and safety monitoring for all of the trials it supports. The latest addendum to ICH GCP, E6(R2), discusses a need for quality management across the clinical trial lifecycle. As we continue to disseminate and share information during the development of our self-study monitoring module, we are engaging key stakeholders from academia, government, and private institutions to understand and address quality challenges in conducting clinical trials. Finally, this research informs dissemination and implementation research, specifically for creating training for academic research professionals.