Friday, July 3, 2020

MGH: Part II - A Guide to Understanding Clinical Trials

Here is Part II of the MGH "A Guide to Understanding Clinical Trials".

Since the start of the SARS-COV-2 (COVID-19) outbreak, scientists have repeatedly advocated for the use of well-structured clinical trials in testing new treatments for the disease. But what does a well-structured trial look like?
In part one of this series, we discussed how clinical trials are set up. In part two, we highlight a few key components to look for when reading about the latest research and clinical trials, because they are not created equal.
Maurizio Fava, MD, Psychiatrist-in-Chief at Massachusetts General Hospital and Director of the Division of Clinical Research of the Mass General Research Institute, stresses the “importance of well-designed studies and clinical trials, as today’s clinical research will help us improve the standard of care of the future. This is absolutely critical for conditions such as COVID-19, given the need to develop ways to both prevent it and treat it.”
Here are a few things to look for to ensure that results are as accurate as possible:

Sample size: The number of patients/participants studied

The number of people involved in a clinical trial is critical because scientists are basing the success of the treatment on how it affects the participants involved. These insights that get applied to an entire population, so ensuring they are as accurate as possible is important for everyone’s safety. 
For example, a treatment that appears to work well in a sample of 20 participants may not work as well when that pool is expanded to hundreds or thousands of participants.
Keep in mind, a small sample size may also make key differences harder to spot and may not be representative of or applicable to a larger population. If a study is done on a small homogenous group with similar demographics (age, health status, ethnicity, gender, etc.), there is no telling how it could affect other demographics.

Placebo: An inactive substance given in the place of a treatment

Placebos are used when there is no existing standard of care to test a new treatment against. They are typically designed to look like the medication that is being tested but do not have a therapeutic effect. 
Testing a new treatment against a placebo gives researchers something to compare their results to and helps to eliminate bias in patient-reported outcomes.

Randomization: Assigning treatments to participants at random

Randomization is the process of randomly assigning patients to either the treatment or control group without considering underlying factors such as disease state, age, weight or medical history.
For example, if all young participants receive an experimental treatment and get better, while all older participants receive standard treatment and fare worse, it would be difficult to prove the experimental treatment was the sole cause of improvement, because age could play a role. 
However, if the experimental treatment was distributed to all participants at random and the health of the experimental group improved (regardless of age), it would be easier to draw more accurate conclusions.

Peer review: A process in which experts in the same field objectively review a scientific study before publication

Peer review is a vetting process that allows impartial subject matter experts who were not involved in the study to review research before it is published. It is critical to scientific discovery because it helps validate and improve the quality of research.
There are some cases where scientists will opt to publish their findings in a non-peer reviewed journal because it is faster and easier than going through the peer review process, but this also means there is potential for errors and findings may not be accepted by the broader scientific community.
Non-peer reviewed studies have become increasingly popular, so when reading about scientific findings or new study results, it is important to check where those results have been published.

Blinded studies: Studies that withhold treatment information from patients or researchers to reduce bias

There are two types of blinded studies: single-blind and double-blind.
  • Single-blind: Researchers know if participants are receiving the treatment or the placebo/standard of care, but participants do not. This helps reduce participant bias by limiting the “placebo effect”—a form of unconscious bias that can sometimes lead people to feel better after believing they have been given a new treatment, even if it was an inert substance or standard treatment.
  • Double-blind: Neither participants nor the researchers know who is receiving treatment. This is considered the “gold standard” in clinical trials because it helps reduce participant and researcher bias. With both groups having little information to influence their perspective, the study is likely to produce more accurate results.
One of the first high profile clinical trials for hydroxychloroquine as a potential treatment for COVID-19 received sharp criticism from the scientific community due to several issues with its structure. 
Critics were quick to point out that the sample size was small with just 42 participants, the control and treatment group participants did not appear to be randomly selected and several negative patient outcomes were excluded from the results.
Two additional studies from The Lancet and The New England Journal of Medicinewere also recently retracted. Findings gathered from The Lancet study were called into question when the scientific community noticed homogenous patient data and potential issues with the statistical analyses. Researchers leading The New England Journal of Medicine study were forced to retract their study when they could not validate their supporting research.
As we move forward and learn of new findings from researchers working to uncover the mechanisms behind disease, it is important to ask questions and critically examine the supporting research before accepting new findings as facts.

Thursday, June 25, 2020

MGH: A Guide to Understanding Clinical Trials" Part 1

Although this article is not specific to ovarian cancer, "A Guide to Understanding Clinical Trials" is important info for all of us.

Published on the MassGeneral website, I am including the full text below. This is part 1.

When a new disease such as COVID-19 is discovered, it is up to doctors and scientists to investigate how the disease behaves so treatments can be developed and tested.
There are numerous clinical trials for COVID-19 therapeutics across the globe, and results from these trials (often uncontrolled and published in non-peer reviewed journals) are being released on a regular basis.
With all of the new information coming out so rapidly, it can be confusing to understand what these results mean. The Mass General Research Institute is providing a resource to explain how clinical trials work and share what makes for a strong clinical trial with clear and promising results.

What are clinical trials and why are they important?

Clinical trials are scientific studies designed to test the safety and usefulness of new medical interventions such as treatments, devices, preventative care, screening or diagnostic procedures, and more.
They are crucial to the advancement of strong science and patient care because, if well-designed, they can validate the performance of an intervention under controlled circumstances to ensure it is safe, effective and provides measurable benefits to patients.

How do they work?

Scientists typically conduct research on a disease or potential treatment for several years to lay a foundation for a clinical trial. During this time, they are gathering as much information as possible to learn about how a disease behaves, what it does to the body, which populations are at risk for it and what may be potential targets for treatment. Research can move into the next phase, called preclinical or translational research, once enough promising and validated reproducible data have been generated to justify further testing.
Preclinical trials are the first opportunity to see how a treatment may work in specific non-human models. In this stage, scientists must follow strict guidelines to test their interventions in vitro (in a petri dish or test tube) or in vivo (in a living organism such as an animal model) before moving on to human trials. If the findings are promising, investigators must fill out the necessary paperwork and get approval so the study can move onto a Phase I clinical trial.

What happens in the four phases of clinical trials?

According to the Federal Drug Administration (FDA), there are four phases of clinical trials that each inform decisions made in the next phase:
  • Focus: Establishing the safety and correct dosage of a treatment
  • Time frame: Typically lasts several months
  • Sample size: 20-100 participants who are either healthy or have the targeted condition
  • Bottom line: Designed to understand how the treatment and dosage are tolerated within the human body

Tuesday, June 23, 2020

Ovarian Cancer National Conference, Oct. 2020

The Ovarian Cancer Research Alliance (OCRA) will be holding its national conference from Sept 29 - Oct 2.

In their own words:
Join us (virtually) September 29 – October 2!
The global pandemic may have upended our original plans but it can’t stop us from uniting the ovarian cancer community from all over the world.  The format may be different (no in-person hugs) but we promise to provide the same eye-opening, educational content from the country’s top researchers and doctors about every aspect of ovarian cancer, including treatment, wellness, advocacy and survivorship, as we always have but this time with a few surprises. 
While we’re undeniably disappointed that we won’t be able to see everyone in person, there is a significant up-side to moving our conference online: Now anyone who wants to attend will have the chance, no travel necessary! We’re excited to expand our strong and welcoming community to reach even more people with important updates in the ovarian cancer field and OCRA’s patient support programs.
Past attendees have said that this conference is a can’t miss event for the ovarian cancer community:  a gathering of hope, inspiration, new found knowledge and sisterhood.
We are excited for you to join us!
To register, follow this link.

Monday, June 22, 2020

Nirapamib Wins FDA Approval for Front-Line Treatment of OC

Nirapamib a PARP inhibitor, is now available for maintenance treatment in all women with advanced epithelial, primary peritoneal or fallopian cancer regardless of BRCA mutation status who have responded to platinum based chemo.

Olaparib (Lynparza) is only approved for women with germline BRCA mutations.

PARP inhibitors work by preventing cancer cells from repairing their DNA damage caused by previous anticancer medications.

Despite FDA approval for front-line therapy after platinum based chemo, the side effects may make the drug intolerable for some women. These include anemia, neutropenia, GI toxicity and fatigue.

To read more about Nirapamib's approval, follow this link.