National Academies Press: OpenBook
« Previous: 8 Building a Robust Clinical Trials Infrastructure
Suggested Citation:"References." Institute of Medicine. 2010. Transforming Clinical Research in the United States: Challenges and Opportunities: Workshop Summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12900.
×

in type 1 diabetes. She addressed key issues and strategies for overcoming challenges in recruiting and retaining clinical trial subjects, designing trial protocols for Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval, and navigating requirements of the informed consent process.

Patient Recruitment and Retention

Greenbaum described the process of identifying, screening, and recruiting patients to participate in a type 1 diabetes natural history/prevention trial. To achieve enrollment of the 300–400 patients necessary for a prevention trial, 200,000 relatives of people with type 1 diabetes will need to be screened, a number representing approximately 2–3 percent of the total potential pool of such individuals. About 4 percent, or 8,000, of these 200,000 individuals will be antibody positive—the necessary trait for participating in the trial. After 5 years of patient recruitment efforts, approximately 70,000 relatives have been screened; progress has been steady but remains a challenge. Greenbaum noted that the magnitude of the screening effort necessary to find the relatives at risk for type 1 diabetes and eligible for the prevention study is sustainable only with the broad support of a clinical research network, in this case TrialNet.

Limited information is available regarding how people approach the decision of whether or not to participate in a diabetes clinical trial. Greenbaum speculated whether people with diabetes know that their families are at 15 times greater risk for the disease than the general population, and whether they know that they can be tested or know but prefer not to be tested. In the absence of any systematic, rigorous study in this area, Greenbaum offered a few anecdotal thoughts about why people participate in diabetes trials. In her experience in the northwestern United States, rural participation in diabetes clinical trials is much greater than urban or suburban participation. Greenbaum hypothesized that in urban and suburban areas, families may already be so overwhelmed by such demands as having to take children to various school events and team practices that joining a clinical trial would be an additional, and unwanted, burden.

Greenbaum also described the age distribution of the relatives screened for the type 1 diabetes prevention study. Young adults (ages 19–32) are participating in research at a much lower rate than other age groups. In Greenbaum’s experience, the young adult population is difficult to recruit for clinical research because it is generally characterized by a level of self-absorption that does not lend itself to voluntary participation in a clinical trial that may or may not lead to any personal benefit.

In contrast to prevention studies, clinical trials on the new onset of type 1 diabetes have had greater success in identifying and recruiting participants. Figure 7-2 shows the recruitment rates for four such trials. Greenbaum

Suggested Citation:"References." Institute of Medicine. 2010. Transforming Clinical Research in the United States: Challenges and Opportunities: Workshop Summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12900.
×
FIGURE 7-2 Patient recruitment rates for four type 1 diabetes trials.

FIGURE 7-2 Patient recruitment rates for four type 1 diabetes trials.

SOURCE: Greenbaum, 2009. Reprinted with permission from Carla Greenbaum 2009.

discussed some of the factors associated with each study that she believes affected their ability to attract patients in an efficient manner.

For each trial depicted in Figure 7-2, the sites were large diabetes centers that are highly committed to recruiting patients. Thus, differences in recruitment rates should not be attributable to variation in the commitment level of trial sites. The trial that recruited 4.1 subjects per month required daily, chronic medication therapy. In the trial that recruited 5.4 patients per month, the drug treatment was two doses (not a chronic therapy), and some follow-up visits were required. The study with the most successful patient recruitment rate is surprising because it involved younger subjects, who, as noted, are typically difficult to recruit, for an intravenous (IV) infusion over 24 visits, one visit per month. In contrast, the study with the lowest recruitment rate has yet to recruit the 10 subjects it requires. Greenbaum explained that this is a phase I study, started at only one site and including only individuals aged 18 and older. In addition, subjects have to have been diagnosed with type 1 diabetes at least 4 years previously, but still have significant insulin secretion to qualify for enrollment in the study.

Suggested Citation:"References." Institute of Medicine. 2010. Transforming Clinical Research in the United States: Challenges and Opportunities: Workshop Summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12900.
×

In light of these differences in recruitment rates, Greenbaum discussed factors that, in her view, can impact patient enrollment and retention:

  • Enthusiastic health care providers—Greenbaum and Kahn both referred to the importance of having research teams that are supported by full-time equivalent (FTE) employees. With time dedicated to clinical research, staffs have a greater sense of responsibility for enrolling and retaining patients in a trial. Greenbaum indicated that within her home institution, the successful recruitment and retention of study participants is due to the connections research staffs have with patients and families. The relationship between staff and patients engenders a strong sense of loyalty to the study, as well as to each other.

  • Patient vulnerability—There is a level of vulnerability associated with patients who are newly diagnosed with a disease. In Greenbaum’s experience, individuals entering clinical trials are looking to cure their diabetes, regardless of the information presented to them on consent forms. Perhaps people who are further from diagnosis are not enrolling in clinical trials at the same high rate as those who are newly diagnosed because they have adapted to the lifestyle of their condition and are more attuned to the risks and benefits of a particular study. Greenbaum also noted the high level of clinical trial participation among children and speculated that it may be associated with parents’ sense of guilt and fear and their desire to do anything they can to help their children, including enrolling them in clinical trials.

  • Socioeconomic status—Greenbaum noted, as did Musa Mayer (Chapter 6), that variations in socioeconomic status (income, education, occupation) affect an individual’s level of engagement with the health care system and exposure to clinical trials. An individual with higher socioeconomic status may be more likely to be aware of the clinical research opportunities available and better equipped to weigh the risks and benefits of participating as a research subject.

  • Physician support—The critical importance of physician support in recruiting and retaining patients in clinical trials was noted by Greenbaum, as well as a number of workshop participants. Most clinical trial subjects cite their physician’s encouragement as the reason why they decided to participate in a clinical trial.

Reflecting on her work with TrialNet, Greenbaum also highlighted a number of effective tools this network brings to the clinical trial process and to the recruitment and retention of patients. TrialNet uses FTE-supported

Suggested Citation:"References." Institute of Medicine. 2010. Transforming Clinical Research in the United States: Challenges and Opportunities: Workshop Summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12900.
×
Page 81
Suggested Citation:"References." Institute of Medicine. 2010. Transforming Clinical Research in the United States: Challenges and Opportunities: Workshop Summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12900.
×
Page 82
Suggested Citation:"References." Institute of Medicine. 2010. Transforming Clinical Research in the United States: Challenges and Opportunities: Workshop Summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12900.
×
Page 83
Next: Appendix A Agenda »
Transforming Clinical Research in the United States: Challenges and Opportunities: Workshop Summary Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $50.00 Buy Ebook | $39.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

An ideal health care system relies on efficiently generating timely, accurate evidence to deliver on its promise of diminishing the divide between clinical practice and research. There are growing indications, however, that the current health care system and the clinical research that guides medical decisions in the United States falls far short of this vision. The process of generating medical evidence through clinical trials in the United States is expensive and lengthy, includes a number of regulatory hurdles, and is based on a limited infrastructure. The link between clinical research and medical progress is also frequently misunderstood or unsupported by both patients and providers.

The focus of clinical research changes as diseases emerge and new treatments create cures for old conditions. As diseases evolve, the ultimate goal remains to speed new and improved medical treatments to patients throughout the world. To keep pace with rapidly changing health care demands, clinical research resources need to be organized and on hand to address the numerous health care questions that continually emerge. Improving the overall capacity of the clinical research enterprise will depend on ensuring that there is an adequate infrastructure in place to support the investigators who conduct research, the patients with real diseases who volunteer to participate in experimental research, and the institutions that organize and carry out the trials.

To address these issues and better understand the current state of clinical research in the United States, the Institute of Medicine's (IOM) Forum on Drug Discovery, Development, and Translation held a 2-day workshop entitled Transforming Clinical Research in the United States. The workshop, summarized in this volume, laid the foundation for a broader initiative of the Forum addressing different aspects of clinical research. Future Forum plans include further examining regulatory, administrative, and structural barriers to the effective conduct of clinical research; developing a vision for a stable, continuously funded clinical research infrastructure in the United States; and considering strategies and collaborative activities to facilitate more robust public engagement in the clinical research enterprise.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!