How to Improve Cancer Patients ENrollment in Clinical Trials From rEal-Life Databases Using the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership Oncology Extension: Results of the PENELOPE Initiative in Urologic Cancers

International audiencePURPOSE To compare the computability of Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership (OMOP)–based queries related to prescreening of patients using two versions of the OMOP common data model (CDM; v5.3 and v5.4) and to assess the performance of the Greater Paris University Hospital (APHP) prescreening tool.MATERIALS AND METHODS We identified the prescreening information items being relevant for prescreening of patients with cancer. We randomly selected 15 academic and industry-sponsored urology phase I-IV clinical trials (CTs) launched at APHP between 2016 and 2021. The computability of the related prescreening criteria (PC) was defined by their translation rate in OMOP-compliant queries and by their execution rate on the APHP clinical data warehouse (CDW) containing data of 205,977 patients with cancer. The overall performance of the prescreening tool was assessed by the rate of true- and false-positive cases of three randomly selected CTs.RESULTS We defined a list of 15 minimal information items being relevant for patients' prescreening. We identified 83 PC of the 534 eligibility criteria from the 15 CTs. We translated 33 and 62 PC in queries on the basis of OMOP CDM v5.3 and v5.4, respectively (translation rates of 40% and 75%, respectively). Of the 33 PC translated in the v5.3 of the OMOP CDM, 19 could be executed on the APHP CDW (execution rate of 58%). Of 83 PC, the computability rate on the APHP CDW reached 23%. On the basis of three CTs, we identified 17, 32, and 63 patients as being potentially eligible for inclusion in those CTs, resulting in positive predictive values of 53%, 41%, and 21%, respectively. CONCLUSION We showed that PC could be formalized according to the OMOP CDM and that the oncology extension increased their translation rate through better representation of cancer natural history

Electronic health records (EHRs) in clinical research and platform trials:Application of the innovative EHR-based methods developed by EU-PEARL

Objective: Electronic Health Record (EHR) systems are digital platforms in clinical practice used to collect patients’ clinical information related to their health status and represents a useful storage of real-world data. EHRs have a potential role in research studies, in particular, in platform trials. Platform trials are innovative trial designs including multiple trial arms (conducted simultaneously and/or sequentially) on different treatments under a single master protocol. However, the use of EHRs in research comes with important challenges such as incompleteness of records and the need to translate trial eligibility criteria into interoperable queries. In this paper, we aim to review and to describe our proposed innovative methods to tackle some of the most important challenges identified. This work is part of the Innovative Medicines Initiative (IMI) EU Patient-cEntric clinicAl tRial pLatforms (EU-PEARL) project's work package 3 (WP3), whose objective is to deliver tools and guidance for EHR-based protocol feasibility assessment, clinical site selection, and patient pre-screening in platform trials, investing in the building of a data-driven clinical network framework that can execute these complex innovative designs for which feasibility assessments are critically important. Methods: ISO standards and relevant references informed a readiness survey, producing 354 criteria with corresponding questions selected and harmonised through a 7-round scoring process (0–1) in stakeholder meetings, with 85% of consensus being the threshold of acceptance for a criterium/question. ATLAS cohort definition and Cohort Diagnostics were mainly used to create the trial feasibility eligibility (I/E) criteria as executable interoperable queries. Results: The WP3/EU-PEARL group developed a readiness survey (eSurvey) for an efficient selection of clinical sites with suitable EHRs, consisting of yes-or-no questions, and a set-up of interoperable proxy queries using physicians’ defined trial criteria. Both actions facilitate recruiting trial participants and alignment between study costs/timelines and data-driven recruitment potential.Conclusion: The eSurvey will help create an archive of clinical sites with mature EHR systems suitable to participate in clinical trials/platform trials, and the interoperable proxy queries of trial eligibility criteria will help identify the number of potential participants. Ultimately, these tools will contribute to the production of EHR-based protocol design.</p

Current state-of-the-art and gaps in platform trials: 10 things you should know, insights from EU-PEARL

Summary: Platform trials bring the promise of making clinical research more efficient and more patient centric. While their use has become more widespread, including their prominent role during the COVID-19 pandemic response, broader adoption of platform trials has been limited by the lack of experience and tools to navigate the critical upfront planning required to launch such collaborative studies. The European Union-Patient-cEntric clinicAl tRial pLatform (EU-PEARL) initiative has produced new methodologies to expand the use of platform trials with an overarching infrastructure and services embedded into Integrated Research Platforms (IRPs), in collaboration with patient representatives and through consultation with U.S. Food and Drug Administration and European Medicines Agency stakeholders. In this narrative review, we discuss the outlook for platform trials in Europe, including challenges related to infrastructure, design, adaptations, data sharing and regulation. Documents derived from the EU-PEARL project, alongside a literature search including PubMed and relevant grey literature (e.g., guidance from regulatory agencies and health technology agencies) were used as sources for a multi-stage collaborative process through which the 10 more important points based on lessons drawn from the EU-PEARL project were developed and summarised as guidance for the setup of platform trials. We conclude that early involvement of critical stakeholder such as regulatory agencies or patients are critical steps in the implementation and later acceptance of platform trials. Addressing these gaps will be critical for attaining the full potential of platform trials for patients. Funding: Innovative Medicines Initiative 2 Joint Undertaking with support from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme and EFPIA