ABSTRACT
The COVID-19 pandemic triggered an unprecedented research effort to develop vaccines and therapeutics. Urgency dictated that development and regulatory assessment were accelerated, while maintaining all standards for quality, safety and efficacy. To speed up evaluation the European Medicines Agency (EMA) implemented "rolling reviews” allowing developers to submit data for assessment as they became available.We discuss the clinical trial designs and the applied statistical approaches in vaccine efficacy trials, focusing on aspects such as multiple testing, interim and updated analyses, and reporting of results for the first four vaccines recommended for approval by the EMA. The fast accrual of COVID-19 cases in the clinical vaccine efficacy trials led to multiple data updates within a short time frame, which had consequences for the evaluation and interpretation of results. Key trial results are discussed in the light of these aspects. Notably, the aspects discussed did not affect the benefit/risk relationship in a meaningful way, which was clearly positive for all four vaccines.Assessment of the development and evaluation of the four vaccine trials during the pandemic has led to a proposal for standardised terminology for trials with multiple analyses and a recommendation to appropriately pre-plan the timing of primary and updated analyses. For the reporting of updated estimates of vaccine efficacy, we discuss how to best describe the uncertainty around estimates of vaccine efficacy (e.g., via confidence intervals). Finally, we briefly highlight the benefit of a comprehensive discussion on estimands for vaccine efficacy trials. [ FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of Statistics in Biopharmaceutical Research is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full . (Copyright applies to all s.)
ABSTRACT
Despite recent and potent technological advances, the real-world implementation of remote digital health technology in the care and monitoring of patients with motor neuron disease has not yet been realized. Digital health technology may increase the accessibility to and personalization of care, whereas remote biosensors could optimize the collection of vital clinical parameters, irrespective of patients' ability to visit the clinic. To facilitate the wide-scale adoption of digital health care technology and to align current initiatives, we outline a road map that will identify clinically relevant digital parameters; mediate the development of benefit-to-burden criteria for innovative technology; and direct the validation, harmonization, and adoption of digital health care technology in real-world settings. We define two key end products of the road map: (1) a set of reliable digital parameters to capture data collected under free-living conditions that reflect patient-centric measures and facilitate clinical decision making and (2) an integrated, open-source system that provides personalized feedback to patients, health care providers, clinical researchers, and caregivers and is linked to a flexible and adaptable platform that integrates patient data in real time. Given the ever-changing care needs of patients and the relentless progression rate of motor neuron disease, the adoption of digital health care technology will significantly benefit the delivery of care and accelerate the development of effective treatments.
Subject(s)
Motor Neuron Disease , Biomedical Technology , Caregivers , Health Personnel , Humans , Motor Neuron Disease/diagnosis , Motor Neuron Disease/therapy , TechnologyABSTRACT
The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) crisis confronted us, like many researchers worldwide, with an unforeseen challenge during the final stages of a randomized controlled trial involving ataxia patients. Institutional guidelines suddenly no longer allowed regular follow-up visits to take place, impeding the clinical evaluation of long-term outcomes. Here, we discuss the various scenarios that we considered in response to these imposed restrictions and share our experience of home video recording by dedicated, extensively instructed family members. Albeit somewhat unconventional at first glance, this last resort strategy enabled us to reliably assess the study's primary endpoint at the predefined point in time and hopefully encourages researchers in other ongoing ataxia trials to continue their activities. Remote assessments of ataxia severity may serve as a reasonable substitute in interventional trials beyond the current exceptional situation generated by the COVID-19 pandemic, but will require further investigation.