Clinical research during the COVID-19 pandemic: The role of virtual visits and digital approaches.

Clinical trials are a fundamental tool in evaluating the safety and efficacy of new drugs, medical devices, and health system interventions. Clinical trial visits generally involve eligibility assessment, enrollment, intervention administration, data collection, and follow-up, with many of these steps performed during face-to-face visits between participants and the investigative team. Social distancing, which emerged as one of the mainstay strategies for reducing the spread of SARS-CoV-2, has presented a challenge to the traditional model of clinical trial conduct, causing many research teams to halt all in-person contacts except for life-saving research. Nonetheless, clinical research has continued during the pandemic because study teams adapted quickly, turning to virtual visits and other similar methods to complete critical research activities. The purpose of this special communication is to document this rapid transition to virtual methodologies at Clinical and Translational Science Awards hubs and highlight important considerations for future development. Looking beyond the pandemic, we envision that a hybrid approach, which implements remote activities when feasible but also maintains in-person activities as necessary, will be adopted more widely for clinical trials. There will always be a need for in-person aspects of clinical research, but future study designs will need to incorporate remote capabilities.

The relationship between depression and smoking cessation outcomes in treatment-seeking substance abusers.

The National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network (CTN) recently completed a randomized, open label trial comparing treatment as usual (TAU) combined with nicotine patches plus cognitive behavioral group counseling for smoking cessation (n = 153) to TAU alone (n = 72) for patients enrolled in treatment programs for drug or alcohol dependence, who were interested in quitting smoking. This report is a secondary analysis evaluating the effect of depressive symptomatology (n = 70) or history of depression (n = 110) on smoking cessation outcomes. A significant association was seen between measures of depression and difficulty quitting cigarettes. Specifically, there was a greater probability for smoking abstinence for those with lower baseline Beck Depression Inventory II (BDI-II) scores. These data suggest that evaluation and treatment of depressive symptoms may play an important role in improving smoking cessation outcomes. (Am J Addict 2010;00:1-8).

Quality assurance of research protocols conducted in the community: the National Institute on Drug Abuse Clinical Trials Network experience.

BACKGROUND: Quality assurance (QA) of clinical trials is essential to protect the welfare of trial participants and the integrity of the data collected. However, there is little detailed information available on specific procedures and outcomes of QA monitoring for clinical trials. PURPOSE: This article describes the experience of the National Institute on Drug Abuse's (NIDA) National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network (CTN) in devising and implementing a three-tiered QA model for rigorous multi-site randomized clinical trials implemented in community-based substance abuse treatment programs. The CTN QA model combined local and national resources and was developed to address the unique needs of clinical trial sites with limited research experience. METHODS: The authors reviewed internal records maintained by the sponsor, a coordinating site (Lead Nodes), and a local site detailing procedural development, training sessions, protocol violation monitoring, and site visit reporting. RESULTS: Between January 2001 and September 2005, the CTN implemented 21 protocols, of which 18 were randomized clinical trials, one was a quality improvement study and two were surveys. Approximately 160 community-based treatment programs participated in the 19 studies that were monitored, with a total of 6560 participants randomized across the sites. During this time 1937 QA site visits were reported across the three tiers of monitoring and the cost depended on the location of the sites and the salaries of the staff involved. One study reported 109 protocol violations (M = 15.6). Examples are presented to highlight training, protocol violation monitoring, site visit frequency and intensity and cost considerations. LIMITATIONS: : QA data from the entire network were not easily available for review as much of the data were not electronically accessible. The authors reviewed and discussed a representative sample of internal data from the studies and participating sites. CONCLUSIONS: The lessons learned from the CTN's experience include the need for balancing thoroughness with efficiency, monitoring early, assessing research staff abilities in order to judge the need for proactive, focused attention, providing targeted training sessions, and developing flexible tools. The CTN model can work for sponsors overseeing studies at sites with limited research experience that require more frequent, in-depth monitoring. We recommend that sponsors not develop a rigid monitoring approach, but work with the study principal investigators to determine the intensity of monitoring needed depending on trial complexity, the risks of the intervention(s), and the experience of the staff with clinical research. After careful evaluation, sponsors should then determine the best approach to site monitoring and what resources will be needed.

Implementation of a Smoking Cessation Treatment Study at Substance Abuse Rehabilitation Programs: Smoking Behavior and Treatment Feasibility Across Varied Community-based Outpatient Programs.

Cigarette smoking is widely prevalent among individuals in treatment for drug or alcohol dependence; however, the treatment of nicotine addiction in this population has numerous obstacles at both programmatic and patient levels. Despite these difficulties, recent studies have demonstrated moderate success in implementing smoking cessation treatment in drug rehabilitation programs. The National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network sponsored a smoking cessation study in 13 community-based outpatient substance abuse rehabilitation programs across the country. The study evaluated the effectiveness of smoking cessation treatment provided as an adjunct to substance abuse treatment-as-usual. This report summarizes the practical and clinical experiences encountered at each of the study sites with regard to implementing the smoking cessation treatment intervention. Smoking behavior of the treatment clientele was assessed by anonymous survey at each site. In addition, sites were systematically characterized by using program review and assessment tools completed by the respective staff and program directors at the site. Survey and recruitment data indicated that cigarette smoking is more prevalent and that smoking cessation treatment is more feasible, in methadone maintenance treatment programs. Other factors associated with smoking behavior and with the recruitment of drug- and alcohol-dependent individuals into the smoking cessation treatment study are described.

Effectiveness of naltrexone in a community treatment program.

OBJECTIVE: In several large, well-designed, randomized, double-blind studies, the opiate antagonist naltrexone demonstrated efficacy in the treatment of alcohol dependence. Specifically, when combined with certain psychosocial therapies, naltrexone reduces the number of drinking days, heavy drinking, and time to relapse to alcohol use in alcohol-dependent individuals. Whether this efficacy can be generalized to individuals who have alcohol use disorders and present for treatment at front-line community treatment programs has not been well established. METHODS: A total of 145 patients who presented for treatment at a rural community substance abuse treatment center were randomized to receive naltrexone 50 mg daily plus usual program treatment (n = 54), placebo plus usual treatment (n = 43), or usual treatment alone (n = 48) for 12 week. A total of 133 participants had at least one follow-up visit. Primary outcome measures included percent days drinking, average drinks per drinking day, average drinks per day, heavy drinking days (four or more for women and six or more for men), and time to first heavy drinking day. Secondary measures included changes in serum biological markers (alkaline phosphatase, alanine transaminase, aspartate transaminase, and gamma-glutamyltransferase), craving, and psychosocial functioning. RESULTS: In the intention-to-treat analysis, there were no between-group differences for any of the primary drinking outcomes at 12 weeks. In post hoc exploratory analyses, the entire sample of participants was divided into two new groups: (1) people who drank during the 2 weeks before the start of medication (entry drinkers) and (2) people who did not drink during this interval (entry abstainers). Entry abstainers were at an advantage at study entry in that they were significantly more likely to have an inpatient hospitalization immediately before entry into outpatient treatment. Mixed-model analysis of variance revealed a main effect for entry group at the 12-week treatment endpoint on the primary outcome measures of percent days drinking, average drinks per drinking day, average drinks per day, heavy drinking days, and time to first heavy drinking day. Participants in any of the randomized groups who were entry abstainers had significantly better improvement on all of the primary outcome measures. The abstainer groups that were randomized to placebo and usual treatment had significantly better outcomes than the entry drinkers in those perspective groups. However, for the naltrexone-treated group, entry drinkers and entry abstainers had similar improvement in drinking-related outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that naltrexone may offer particular benefit to patients who continue to drink during the early stages of the trial as compared with those who have achieved abstinence before treatment entry.

Comparison of self-report versus agency records of service utilization in a community sample of individuals with alcohol use disorders.

Health services research has become an important area for evaluating the cost effectiveness of interventions. When used in treatment outcome research, the accuracy of self-report data is essential. The reliability and validity of self-report service utilization among alcohol and drug addicted individuals is questionable and largely unexplored. This study assessed the accuracy of self-report utilization of services compared to service record abstraction in a sample of treatment seeking individuals with alcohol use disorders. The results of the comparative analysis found that the level of agreement for some services, particularly medical, psychiatric and substance abuse inpatient admissions, and social service involvement was good. There was less agreement in emergency room visits and arrests. Factors related to discrepancies between self-report and records were explored.