Preventing Potential Patient Harm Through Clinical Content Interventions During Oncology Clinical Trial Implementation.

Abstract

Clinical trial documents are complex and may have inconsistencies, leading to potential site implementation errors and may compromise participant safety. This study characterizes the frequency and type of administrative and potential patient safety interventions (PPSIs) made during the review of oncology trial documents for clinical trial implementation by centralized clinical content specialists. A dedicated group of centralized clinical content specialists reviewed trial documents, including the protocol, laboratory manual, and pharmacy/cellular therapy manual, and collected intervention data over a 1-year period. Each trial was categorized by study phase and sponsor type, and multiple interventions could be identified per trial. Interventions were deemed administrative or PPSIs, with PPSIs further subcategorized as medication, laboratory, procedure related, or other. Of 585 clinical trials reviewed, 269 (46%) required intervention(s). Among 1001 interventions, 171 (17.1%) were PPSIs. Most PPSIs were medication related (45.6%), with drug dosing interventions most frequently identified (53.8%). Phase 1 trials had the highest proportion of PPSIs (0.35:1) and administrative interventions (2:1) per trial compared with all other phases. Investigator-initiated trials saw the highest proportion of PPSIs per trial (0.44:1) of all sponsor types. This study demonstrates a gap in patient safety when assessing trial documents for clinical trial implementation. One solution to address this gap is the utilization of a centralized team of clinical specialists to preemptively review trial documents, thereby enhancing patient safety during clinical trial conduct.