BACKGROUND: Solving complex research challenges requires innovative thinking and alternative approaches to traditional methods. One such example is the problem of arm and hand, or upper limb function in multiple sclerosis (MS), a neurological condition affecting approximately 2.9 million people worldwide and more than 150,000 in the United Kingdom. Historically, clinical trials and research have focused on mobility and walking ability. This excludes a large number of patients who are wheelchair users, limiting their quality of life and restricting access to possibly helpful medications. To address this issue, the ThinkHand campaign was launched in 2016, aiming to raise awareness about the importance of upper limb function in MS and develop alternative ways to measure, record, and account for hand and arm function changes.
METHODS: The campaign utilised innovative strategies at scientific conferences and online surveys to engage people affected by MS, healthcare professionals, charities, and researchers in discussing the importance of preserving upper limb function. Through co-design and interdisciplinary collaboration, the campaign developed new tools like the low-cost cardboard version of the Nine-Hole Peg Test, facilitating remote monitoring of hand function. Additionally, the campaign co-created the \"Under & Over\" rehabilitation tool, allowing individuals with advanced MS to participate in a remote rehabilitation program.The impact of the ThinkHand campaign has been significant, helping to shift the focus of both academic and industry-supported trials, including the O\'HAND and ChariotMS trials, both using upper limb function as their primary end point. The campaign\'s patient-centred approach highlighted the importance of recognising patients\' perspectives in research and challenged established assumptions and practices. It demonstrated the effectiveness of interdisciplinary collaboration, systems thinking, and co-creation with stakeholders in tackling complex problems.
CONCLUSIONS: The ThinkHand campaign provides valuable insights for health research practices. By involving patients at all stages, researchers can gain a deeper understanding of the impact of disease on their lives, identify gaps and focus research on their needs. Experimentation and iteration can lead to innovative solutions, and openness to unconventional methods can drive widespread change. The ThinkHand campaign exemplifies the potential of patient-centred approaches to address complex research challenges and revolutionise the field of MS research and management. Embracing such approaches will contribute to more inclusive and impactful research in the future.
Solving complex research challenges requires creative thinking and new ways of doing things. One such challenge is understanding the problems with arm and hand function in multiple sclerosis (MS), a neurological condition that affects more than 150,000 in the United Kingdom. In the past, research focused mainly on walking ability, leaving out many people who use wheelchairs.To tackle this issue, we created the ThinkHand campaign in 2016. Its goal was to raise awareness about the importance of hand and arm function for people with MS (pwMS) and find better ways to measure changes in these functions such that they can become outcomes in clinical trials. This could provide a pathway to better treatments for pwMS who cannot walk.The campaign used various methods, including surveys, social media posts, exhibitions and music to involve pwMS, healthcare professionals, charities, and researchers in discussions about the issues. Working together, they created tools to support pwMS, particularly those at an advanced stage of the disease (pwAMS), to take part in research and measure their hand and arm function. Through our collaborative approach focusing on patients’ perspectives, the campaign challenged old ideas and deeply embedded practices. It showed that collaboration between different areas of expertise involving pwMS at all stages of research can help solve complex problems. This campaign teaches us valuable lessons for health research. When researchers listen to patients and try new things, they can better understand how a disease affects people’s lives and develop better solutions.In conclusion, we show how embracing a patient-centred approach can address complex research challenges and improve how we study and manage MS and other conditions in the future.

The coronavirus disease-2019 pandemic resulted in a major increase in depression and anxiety disorders worldwide, which increased the demand for mental health services. However, clinical interventions for treating mental disorders are currently insufficient to meet this growing demand. There is an urgent need to conduct scientific and standardized clinical research that are consistent with the features of mental disorders in order to deliver more effective and safer therapies in the clinic. Our study aimed to expose the challenges, complexities of study design, ethical issues, sample selection, and efficacy evaluation in clinical research for mental disorders. The reliance on subjective symptom presentation and rating scales for diagnosing mental diseases was discovered, emphasizing the lack of clear biological standards, which hampers the construction of rigorous research criteria. We underlined the possibility of psychotherapy in efficacy evaluation alongside medication treatment, proposing for a multidisciplinary approach comprising psychiatrists, neuroscientists, and statisticians. To comprehend mental disorders progression, we recommend the development of artificial intelligence integrated evaluation tools, the use of precise biomarkers, and the strengthening of longitudinal designs. In addition, we advocate for international collaboration to diversity samples and increase the dependability of findings, with the goal of improving clinical research quality in mental disorders through sample representativeness, accurate medical history gathering, and adherence to ethical principles.

UNASSIGNED: The generation of structured documents for clinical trials is a promising application of large language models (LLMs). We share opportunities, insights, and challenges from a competitive challenge that used LLMs for automating clinical trial documentation.
UNASSIGNED: As part of a challenge initiated by Pfizer (organizer), several teams (participant) created a pilot for generating summaries of safety tables for clinical study reports (CSRs). Our evaluation framework used automated metrics and expert reviews to assess the quality of AI-generated documents.
UNASSIGNED: The comparative analysis revealed differences in performance across solutions, particularly in factual accuracy and lean writing. Most participants employed prompt engineering with generative pre-trained transformer (GPT) models.
UNASSIGNED: We discuss areas for improvement, including better ingestion of tables, addition of context and fine-tuning.
UNASSIGNED: The challenge results demonstrate the potential of LLMs in automating table summarization in CSRs while also revealing the importance of human involvement and continued research to optimize this technology.

UNASSIGNED: Medical ethics guidelines require of clinical trial investigators and sponsors to inform prospective trial participants of all known and potential risks associated with investigational medical products, and to obtain their free informed consent. These guidelines also require that clinical research be so designed as to minimize harms and maximize benefits.
UNASSIGNED: To examine Merck\'s scientific rationale for using a reactogenic aluminum-containing \"placebo\" in Gardasil HPV vaccine pre-licensure clinical trials.
UNASSIGNED: We examined the informed consent form and the recruitment brochure for the FUTURE II Gardasil vaccine trial conducted in Denmark; and we interviewed several FUTURE II trial participants and their treating physicians. We also reviewed regulatory documentation related to Gardasil vaccine approval process and the guidelines on evaluation of adjuvants used in human vaccines.
UNASSIGNED: It was found that the vaccine manufacturer Merck made several inaccurate statements to trial participants that compromised their right to informed consent. First, even though the study protocol listed safety testing as one of the study\'s primary objectives, the recruitment brochure emphasized that FUTURE II was not a safety study, and that the vaccine had already been proven safe. Second, the advertising material for the trial and the informed consent forms stated that the placebo was saline or an inactive substance, when, in fact, it contained Merck\'s proprietary highly reactogenic aluminum adjuvant which does not appear to have been properly evaluated for safety. Several trial participants experienced chronic disabling symptoms, including some randomized to the adjuvant \"placebo\" group.
UNASSIGNED: In our view, the administration of a reactive placebo in Gardasil clinical trials was without any possible benefit, needlessly exposed study subjects to risks, and was therefore a violation of medical ethics. The routine use of aluminum adjuvants as \"placebos\" in vaccine clinical trials is inappropriate as it hinders the discovery of vaccine-related safety signals.

BACKGROUND: Accurately estimating the costs of clinical trials is challenging. There is currently no reference class data to allow researchers to understand the potential costs associated with database change management in clinical trials.
METHODS: We used a case-based approach, summarising post-live changes in eleven clinical trial databases managed by Sheffield Clinical Trials Research Unit. We reviewed the database specifications for each trial and summarised the number of changes, change type, change category, and timing of changes. We pooled our experiences and made observations in relation to key themes.
RESULTS: Median total number of changes across the eleven trials was 71 (range 40-155) and median number of changes per study week was 0.48 (range 0.32-1.34). The most common change type was modification (median 39, range 20-90), followed by additions (median 32, range 18-55), then deletions (median 7, range 1-12). In our sample, changes were more common in the first half of the trial\'s lifespan, regardless of its overall duration. Trials which saw continuous changes seemed more likely to be external pilots or trials in areas where the trial team was either less experienced overall or within the particular therapeutic area.
CONCLUSIONS: Researchers should plan trials with the expectation that clinical trial databases will require changes within the life of the trial, particularly in the early stages or with a less experienced trial team. More research is required to understand potential differences between clinical trial units and database types.

暂无摘要。

Developing new drugs or generating evidence for existing drugs in new indications for ultra-rare cancers is complex and carries a high-risk of failure. This gets even harder in ultra-rare tumours, which have an annual incidence of 1 per 1,000,000 population or less. Here, we illustrate the problem of adequate evidence generation in ultra-rare tumours, using Alveolar Soft-Part Sarcomas (ASPS) - an ultra-rare sarcoma newly diagnosed in approximately 60 persons a year in the European Union - as an exemplar case showing challenges in development despite being potentially relevant for classes of agents. We discuss some possible approaches for addressing such challenges, especially focussing on constructive collaboration between academic groups, patients and advocates, drug manufacturers, and regulators to optimise drug development in ultra-rare cancers. This article, written by various European stakeholders, proposes a way forward to ultimately get better options for patients with ultra-rare cancers.

There is no satisfactory explanation for the sex-related differences in the incidence of many diseases and this is also true of Alzheimer\'s disease (AD), where females have a higher lifetime risk of developing the disease and make up about two thirds of the AD patient population. The importance of understanding the cause(s) that account for this disproportionate distribution cannot be overestimated, and is likely to be a significant factor in the search for therapeutic strategies that will combat the disease and, furthermore, potentially point to a sex-targeted approach to treatment. This review considers the literature in the context of what is known about the impact of sex on processes targeted by drugs that are in clinical trial for AD, and existing knowledge on differing responses of males and females to these drugs. Current knowledge strongly supports the view that trials should make assessing sex-related difference in responses a priority with a focus on exploring the sex-stratified treatments.

BACKGROUND: A treatment\'s overall favorable benefit-risk profile does not imply that every individual patient will benefit from the treatment.
OBJECTIVE: To describe a statistical methodology for quantifying the benefit-risk trade-off in individual patients.
METHODS: The method requires a large randomized controlled trial containing a primary efficacy outcome and a primary safety outcome, for instance, the Thrombin Receptor Antagonist in Secondary Prevention of Atherothrombotic Ischemic Events-Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction 50 placebo-controlled trial of vorapaxar in 17 779 patients following myocardial infarction. Multivariate regression models predict each individual patient\'s risk of ischemic events (benefit) and major bleeding events (harm) based on their profile. Hence, each patient\'s predicted benefit from vorapaxar (reduction in ischemic events) and predicted risk (increase in bleeding events) were estimated. The relative importance of ischemic and bleeding events based on links to all-cause mortality was quantified, although the limitations of such weightings are noted.
RESULTS: Overall results demonstrated both clear benefit and harm from vorapaxar. Substantial interindividual variation in both benefit and risk facilitated distinguishing patients with a favorable benefit-risk trade-off from those who did not. Such findings were applied to recommend vorapaxar in as many as 98.3% of patients in which a favorable mortality-weighted benefit-risk trade-off was present, in 77.2% of patients with ischemic benefit 20% greater than bleeding risk, or in as few as 45.5% of patients if an annual decrease in ischemic risk of ≥0.5% was also required.
CONCLUSIONS: While overall randomized controlled trials of treatment benefit vs risk are valuable, models determining each individual patient\'s estimated absolute benefit and risk provide more useful insight regarding patient-specific benefit-risk trade-offs to better enable personalized therapeutic decision-making.

The ethical value-and to some scholars, necessity-of providing trial patients with post-trial access (PTA) to an investigational drug has been subject to significant attention in the field of research ethics. Although no consensus has emerged, it seems clear that, in some trial contexts, various factors make PTA particularly appropriate. We outline the atypical aspects of psychedelic clinical trials that support the case for introducing the provision of PTA within research in this field, including the broader legal status of psychedelics, the nature of the researcher-therapist/participant relationship, and the extended time-frame of the full therapeutic process. As is increasingly understood, the efficacy of psychedelic-assisted psychotherapy is driven as much by extrapharmacological elements and the cultural therapeutic container as by the drug itself. As such, we also advocate for a refocusing of attention from post-trial access to a broader concept encompassing other elements of post-trial care. We provide an overview of some of the potential post-trial care provisions that may be appropriate in psychedelic clinical trials. Although the World Medical Association\'s Declaration of Helsinki calls on researchers, sponsors, and governments to make provisions for post-trial access, such provision may feel impracticable or out-of-reach within psychedelic trials that are already constrained by a high resource demand and significant bureaucratic burden. We show how conceiving of post-trial provision as an integral site of the research process, and an appropriate destination for research funding, will serve to develop the infrastructure necessary for the post-legalisation psychedelic medicine ecosystem.