Effects of COVID-19 pandemic on the conduct
of clinical trials
Medha A. Joshi a, *
a Consultant, Health Professions Education, Former Director, Medical
Education Unit, and Professor of Pharmacology, International Medical School,
Management and Science University, Bangalore Campus. Bangalore 560054
|
A R T I C L E I N F O |
Received 03 January 2022;
Revised 05 February 2022;
Accepted 21 February 2022. |
|
|
An official publication of
Global Pharmacovigilance Society |
||
Introduction
The novel coronavirus
(SARS-CoV-2) is a new strain of coronavirus that affected the whole world. On
11 March 2020, WHO announced COVID-19 as a pandemic (Organization,
2020). The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted all walks of life
including the conduct of clinical trials of medical products globally. The
pandemic-related restrictions resulted in difficulties in recruiting new
patients or continuing the ongoing trials. ClinicalTrials.gov registered
1773 trials that were suspended
between March 2020 and April 2021, the COVID-19 pandemic being the reason for
this in the majority of trials (McDermott
& Newman, 2021). At the same time, a large number of trials were
initiated to test the safety and efficacy of COVID 19 vaccines around the globe (Kim et
al., 2021). This article will focus on the effects of the COVID
19 pandemic on the non-vaccine trials.
The challenges that were faced by the sponsors and investigators were mainly
due to lockdowns, individual quarantines, conversion of trial sites into COVID
treatment facilities thereby, forcing the temporary closure of sites, travel
restrictions, disruptions to the supply chain for the investigational product,
or other considerations if site personnel or trial subjects became infected
with COVID-19.
Healthcare systems in
many parts of the world were burdened and, in some places, continue to be so
medical personnel was deputed for COVID-19 related activities. These
restrictions affected trial monitoring, data collection, and drug supply
activities. Moreover, the participants were not willing to visit the trial
sites (hospitals) or travel by public transport where they may come in contact
with COVID -19 patients. On the other hand, they might have been unable to
visit the site during the scheduled visits due to health issues related to
COVID infection, for example, self-isolation, quarantine. or hospitalization.
They might have taken medication for the treatment of COVID-19 symptoms which
were not anticipated at the design stage of a given clinical trial. One more
challenge was repeated sample collections required for COVID 19 infection
confirmation before every hospital visit. For example in an anticancer drug
trial protocol sometimes two swabs are mandated and only after the negative test
results trial drug could be administered. If a patient tested positive for
COVID-19, a swab test had to show
negativity after the quarantine period,
and its confirmation at times delayed schedule of the drug
administration.
When faced with these
challenges, it would have been difficult to adhere to procedures specified in
the protocols that are essential for efficacy assessments and to perform
diagnostic or laboratory tests. This would result in compromised trial data and
problems in the interpretation of clinical trial results.
The impact of these
challenges will depend on the severity and duration of each wave of the COVID
19 pandemic, the duration of the trial, the disease condition for which the
trial is conducted, the type of subjects to be recruited or that were recruited
for the trial and trial design elements such as number of visits, the
investigation to be carried out during each visit, etc.
When faced with the
risks and benefits of continuing clinical trials during the pandemic, the trial
personnel had the following alternatives:
á
To discontinue trials if no immediate
benefits to the participants were observed. As we are aware, the benefits of
therapeutic intervention in a randomized trial cannot be predicted until the
trial is completed. Some of these trials might be very beneficial for millions
of people with chronic, debilitating diseases in the post-pandemic era. The
decision to discontinue an ongoing trial would result in a wastage of resources
and the time and effort of participants who may have already completed the
trial, and of trial personnel.
á
If the
disruption in subject recruitment or monitoring was substantial it might not
have been feasible for the trial to be continued.
á
Trials
might have been continued, but the data collected during the pandemic period
will be suspect, posing many methodological challenges (T. R.
Fleming et al., 2020; McDermott & Newman, 2020; Meyer et al., 2020;
Wolkewitz & Puljak, 2020). By "suspect" it means that the data might
have been collected under different circumstances and in a different manner
than specified in the protocol, and may be questionable in terms of its quality
(Akacha
et al., 2020).
á
If the
enrolment of the participants was complete before the pandemic, trials may have
been continued unchanged if the participants could complete the protocol
procedures safely.
á
Once the
vaccines were available and many enrolled patients had taken either the first
or second dose of the vaccine, trial protocols had to be amended to include
such vaccinated status of patients mentioned.
á
Continued
with the trial while replacing the in-person interactions with remote
approaches such as using a courier or drop-off services to deliver devices or
oral medication (Lenze
et al., 2020; McDermott et al., 2021), and telephone or web-based interactions (Depner
et al., 2020) to monitor the
participants.
á
It may be
better to delay the initiation of enrolment of participants for trials that had
not yet begun, or temporarily stop the enrolment in ongoing trials, based on
the site-specific severity of COVID 19 (T. R.
Fleming et al., 2020). Once the number of COVID cases comes down, the
recruitment may be initiated again.
The U.S. Food and
Drug Administration (Food
& Administration, 2020), the European Medicines Agency (T. R.
Fleming, 2011) (EMA 2020a), and CDSCO (2020) have come out with
guidelines for sponsors on how they should manage the clinical trials and
participants during the COVID-19 pandemic. The sponsors are required to collect
the protocol deviations (PDs) and reasons for discontinuation of clinical trial
elements for all ongoing trials. These PDs can be specified separately as
COVID-related to differentiate them from other COVID unrelated PDs. EMA
published second guidance (EMA 2020b) on actions that sponsors should take for
ongoing clinical trials affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. It provides points
to consider to reduce the risk of compromising the integrity and
interpretability of ongoing trials due to COVID-19 while safeguarding the
safety of trial participants as a priority while maintaining compliance with
good clinical practice (GCP).
Data integrity is
defined as the extent to which all trial data are complete, consistent,
accurate, trustworthy, and reliable throughout the data lifecycle (WHO 2019).
During the pandemic period, it is essential to adopt methods of data collection
that will increase the validity of assessments of safety and efficacy (T. R.
Fleming, 2011). Similar
to data integrity, trial integrity is another broader trial conduct-related
concept, which encompasses data integrity and which refers to the ability of a
trial to produce results that are reliable and valid (McDermott
& Newman, 2021). It specifically implies that results are not
affected by (unknown) biases. For example, unblinding
during an ongoing trial can result in a loss of trial integrity (Akacha et al., 2020).
The data collected
and the conclusions drawn from a clinical trial are directly affected by data
and trial integrity. To avoid loss of data integrity, sponsors should consider
other approaches for data collection such as electronic data capture by
patients at home, telecommunication, or telemedicine (McDermott
& Newman, 2020).
Centralized data monitoring,
home visits by the site staff, or use of local instead of central
laboratories are some of the other options available for the continuation of
data collection during the pandemic. Home delivery of the trial medication
could be done through courier or personal visit by the site staff, ensuring the
stability of the medication and the confidentiality of the participants.
Similarly, if the participants are reluctant to visit the hospitals for the
trial-related procedure for the fear of traveling by public transport,
investigators could arrange for private transport facilities.
Adverse
event reporting
Any SAE that is both
unexpected and for which there is a reasonable possibility that the
investigational product caused the SAE, i.e., there is evidence to suggest a
causal relationship between the drug and the adverse event, must be reported to
the CDSCO and ethics committee by the sponsor. There is a possibility that the
participant who gets infected with COVID 19 during the trial may develop SAEs
that are associated with the disease and not due to the investigational product
or the participant may have become more susceptible to developing SAE due to
COVID 19 infection. Whether the SAE is causally related or unrelated to the
investigational product may be decided only after analysis of the unblinded data and is the responsibility of the Data
Monitoring Committee (DMC). Under the pandemic situation, CDSCO is accepting
e-mail submissions of SAE reports with electronic signatures. This has helped
in the timely submission of safety reports (Davis
& Pai, 2020)
Challenges
due to intercurrent events, estimands,
and missing data
The COVID 19 pandemic
affected the clinical trial sites and subjects in terms of conducting the trial
as per the protocol, data integrity, and data analysis (Akacha
et al., 2020). These challenges could be categorized into two broad
categories: those related to administrative and/or operational procedures and
those that are related to the impact of the pandemic on the participants.
Table 1: Challenges
due to intercurrent events, estimands,
and missing data
|
Sr. No. |
Challenges related to administrative or operational
procedures |
Challenges due to the impact of COVID-19 / the
pandemic on the participants |
|
1 |
Treatment discontinued due to disruption or delay in
drug supply |
Trial treatment was discontinued due to COVID-19
symptoms |
|
2 |
Treatment discontinued due to
participantÕs concerns |
Intake of additional medications to treat COVID-19
symptoms |
|
3 |
Failure
to carryout procedures such as, laboratory/diagnostic tests or biopsies. |
Inability to attend scheduled visits due to COVID-19
infection in participants |
|
4 |
Missed visits due to personal safety concerns,
lockdowns, or quarantines |
Exacerbation of chronic conditions such as asthma,
hypertension, or diabetes due to inability to visit hospitals |
|
5 |
Visits outside of the designated time window |
Newly occurring symptoms due to pandemic such as
depression, altered quality of life |
|
6 |
Modified
visits due to overburdened hospital personnel such as telecommunication with
sites, different doctors, etc. |
Death
due to COVID-19 infection |
None of these
challenges were anticipated during the designing of the ongoing trials. In the
randomized, blinded trials, the effect of this may be expected to be equally
distributed in both treatment arms but this may not happen with open-labeled trials. If the clinical trials being carried out
are for immunomodulators or immunosuppressants
and anticancer drugs affecting the immune status, the treatment arm may show
increased complications and subsequent discontinuation of the treatment if the
subjects get infected with COVID 19 virus. The severity of the pandemic also
varied from country to country and sites may have been affected to a variable
degree. Similarly, trials with elderly subjects and those with co-morbidities
such as diabetes and hypertension, chronic kidney or respiratory diseases, were
more likely to be affected by the COVID 19 and might have been affected by the
challenges mentioned in Table 1. (Brown
et al., 2020; Cawthon et al., 2020).
The pediatric
clinical trials too were disturbed by the pandemic. Despite children being less
severely affected by COVID-19 in the first and second wave, the pause in trials
affected some important studies cross all pediatric domains including many that
had taken years to establish (P. F.
Fleming et al., 2021). There was an indirect financial loss when this pause
resulted in delayed sharing of results that had potential cost-saving
implications for the larger patient population (Marshall
et al., 2020; Rubio-San-Sim—n et al., 2020).
ICH E9(R1),
introduced the estimand framework to precisely
describe the treatment effect of interest in a randomized clinical trial. An estimand is defined in the guidance as Ò...the target of
estimation to address the scientific question of interest posed by the trial
objectiveÓ and has five attributes Ð population, treatment, variable
(endpoint), intercurrent events (defined as events
that can occur post-randomization and preclude or affect the interpretation of
the variable) and the summary measure (ICH,
2019). An example of an intercurrent
event in a clinical trial context could be the discontinuation of treatment.
Many of the intercurrent events might have been
addressed during the designing stage of the study but the COVID 19 related intercurrent events would not have been. Hence it is
important to differentiate between COVID-related and unrelated intercurrent events. In such a situation there is a need to
modify the research question to address the unanticipated intercurrent
events due to pandemic. The
unforeseen intercurrent events due to COVID-19
introduce an element of uncertainty to the original research question that
needs to be taken into consideration while analyzing
the data (Akacha et
al., 2017).
The next challenge
faced was the missing data. As per the definition of missing data according to
the ICH E9 addendum (ICH 2019): ÒData that would be meaningful for the
analysis of a given estimand but were not collected.
They should be distinguished from data that do not exist or data that are not
considered meaningful because of an intercurrent
event.". Missing data results in loss of information and may introduce
selection bias. Many of the administrative or operational challenges indicated
in Table 1 may lead to missing data such as missed diagnostic tests or missed
scheduled visits to the site. If
such missing data are not related to the treatment or the health status of the
subject, may be that valid inference can be derived based on the available data
only, that is, there is no need to model the missingness
process (Molenberghs & Kenward, 2007). But if the missing data is due to the health status
of the subjects because of the impact of COVID 19 (Column 2 of Table 1), then the missing data needs
to be accounted for using sensitivity analysis. If such missing data is of
significant magnitude, the protocols and statistical analysis plans will have
to be reorganized, taking the approval of regulatory authorities, and ethical
committees (Akacha
et al., 2020).
Collection
of Data related to complications due to COVID 19
Data related to a
trial participant suffering from confirmed or suspected COVID-19 infection,
concomitant medication, and associated outcomes can be captured as adverse
events that are mandated to be documented during any clinical trial. Other
complications that need to be captured are owing to various other reasons
such as:
á
Withdrawal
of consent or stopping of the drug before the date
á
Missed or
postponed visits beyond protocol permitted time window
á
Alteration
in the assessment, for example, done at home or done at local laboratories.
While documenting the
complications, it would be prudent to mention the detailed account of the
complications as discussed in the above para instead of mentioning 'due to
COVID 19". This information will be extremely useful during the handling
of missing data and primary and secondary data analyses. Moreover, this will
help in understanding the impact of the pandemic on the conclusions drawn from
the trial. These can be either captured along the protocol-associated PDs or
captured separately.
Finally, it is in the
hands of the trialists to decide whether to continue
the trial based on the local conditions, possibility, and value of continuing
or the burden of discontinuing the trial. Accordingly, changes in the protocols
and analysis can be planned and informed to all concerned stakeholders. We
still are in the process of learning about the ultimate impact of COVID 19
infection in terms of manifestations due to emerging variants, treatments, and
extent of distribution of the disease. Data Monitoring Committees (DMCs) will
have a significant role to ensure trial integrity and patient safety (EMA,
2020b).
Moving
forward in ÒNew-NormalÓ
While designing new
clinical trials, the lessons learned during the pandemic might be taken into
account while designing the protocols.
á
The trials
conducted in the past have strict requirements for data collection, diagnostic
tests/procedures, and assessments. The time windows provided for these may be
difficult to keep up for both patients and the trial site, resulting in more
PDs, as discussed above. It would be worthwhile to evaluate the effects of
these PDs on the trial integrity and data interpretation. Based on these
findings the new trial protocols could have more flexible periods and fewer
in-person visits and data collection requirements that are related to primary
endpoints, without affecting the data and trial integrity (Davis
& Pai, 2020). Instead of in-person visits, tele-visits could be
considered, keeping the site visits for essential procedures or tests (McDermott
et al., 2021); McDermott & Newman, 2021).
á
For
recruiting the new participants, the investigator will have to follow all
COVID-related behaviors (CRB) as mandated by the
state and central Government policies.
Patient safety, comfort, and protection need to be the main priority
while recruiting new patients.
á
Investigators
and CRAs need to be tech-savvy so that they are prepared for remote monitoring
and remote approaches if this becomes an accepted norm in the future. Patient
compliance could be improved for remote monitoring by explaining the importance
of it and including it in the ICF. Training program for team personnel to
handle such situations or SOPs to be framed
á
Sponsors
could consider risk-based monitoring or central monitoring or remote monitoring
to minimize the risk to the monitoring and the site team (Davis
& Pai, 2020).
á
Sponsors
could think about increasing monetary compensation for both the participants
and the investigators considering the risk involved in conducting trials during
the pandemic.
á
Budget
provisions should be made to manage unforeseen situations such as home visits
by site personnel, door delivery of investigational products, etc.
á
In case of
injectable trial medication, either the patient or the caregiver may be trained
to give subcutaneous injections, or a local nurse after wearing personal
protection equipment may be recruited to administer the drug.
á
Responsibility
and importance of maintaining the investigational product in a safe and secured
place, not accessible to other family members including children, have to be
intimated to the participants.
á
If the
trial medication has to be injected at the trial site, administration of injections
at clinical facilities capable of achieving adequate social distancing should
be considered.
á
In case
the investigational product is temperature-controlled ambient or cold
(_2¡CÐ8¡C), stability requirements need to be further evaluated. Door delivery
should be undertaken only if the stability can be maintained for the estimated
transit duration from the site to the patient's residence (Davis
& Pai, 2020)
It would be helpful
if the sponsors, investigators, and institutional ethics committees develop
Pandemic-associated protocols based on their experience of conducting trials
during the COVID 19 pandemic. This would come in handy in case we face any
other long-term natural disasters or if the COVID 19 continues to affect our
lives.
Funding
None
Conflict of Interest
None.
References
Akacha, M., Branson, J., Bretz, F., Dharan, B., Gallo,
P., Gathmann, I., Hemmings, R., Jones, J., Xi, D., & Zuber, E. (2020).
Challenges in Assessing the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Integrity
and Interpretability of Clinical Trials. Statistics in Biopharmaceutical
Research, 12(4), 419-426.
Akacha, M., Bretz,
F., Ohlssen, D., Rosenkranz, G., & Schmidli, H. (2017). Estimands and their
role in clinical trials. Statistics in Biopharmaceutical Research, 9(3),
268-271.
Brown, E. E., Kumar,
S., Rajji, T. K., Pollock, B. G., & Mulsant, B. H. (2020). Anticipating and
mitigating the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on AlzheimerÕs disease and
related dementias. The American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 28(7),
712Ð721.
Cawthon, P. M., Orwoll, E. S.,
Ensrud, K. E., Cauley, J. A., Kritchevsky, S. B., Cummings, S. R., &
Newman, A. (2020). Assessing the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic and
Accompanying Mitigation Efforts on Older Adults. The journals of
gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences, 75(9),
e123Ðe125.
Davis, S., & Pai,
S. (2020). Challenges and opportunities for sponsors in conducting clinical
trials during a pandemic. Perspectives in Clinical Research, 11(3),
115-120.
Depner, C. M., Cheng,
P. C., Devine, J. K., Khosla, S., De Zambotti, M., Robillard, R., Vakulin, A.,
& Drummond, S. P. (2020). Wearable technologies for developing sleep and
circadian biomarkers: A summary of workshop discussions. Sleep, 43(2),
zsz254.
Fleming, P. F., Gale,
C., Molloy, E. J., Faust, S. N., Costeloe, K., Juszczak, E., & Roehr, C. C.
(2021). Paediatric research in the times of COVID-19. Pediatric Research,
90(2), 267Ð271.
Fleming, T. R.
(2011). Addressing missing data in clinical trials. Annals of Internal
Medicine, 154(2), 113Ð117.
Fleming, T. R.,
Labriola, D., & Wittes, J. (2020). Conducting clinical research during the
COVID-19 pandemic: Protecting scientific integrity. Jama, 324(1),
33Ð34.
Food, U. S., &
Administration, D. (2020). FDA Guidance on Conduct of Clinical Trials of
Medical Products During COVID-19 Pandemic: Guidance for Industry,
Investigators, and Institutional Review Boards [Updated on April 16, 2020]. United
States. Food and Drug Administration.
Ich, C. (2019). ICH
E9 (R1) addendum on estimands and sensitivity analysis in clinical trials to
the guideline on statistical principles for clinical trials. Proceedings of
the International Conference on Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for
Registration of Pharmaceuticals for Human Use.
Kim, J. H., Marks,
F., & Clemens, J. D. (2021). Looking beyond COVID-19 vaccine phase 3
trials. Nature Medicine, 27(2), 205Ð211.
Lenze, E. J., Mattar,
C., Zorumski, C. F., Stevens, A., Schweiger, J., Nicol, G. E., Miller, J. P.,
Yang, L., Yingling, M., & Avidan, M. S. (2020). Fluvoxamine vs placebo and
clinical deterioration in outpatients with symptomatic COVID-19: A randomized
clinical trial. Jama, 324(22), 2292Ð2300.
Marshall, A. S.,
Sadarangani, M., Scrivens, A., Williams, R., Yong, J., Bowler, U., Linsell, L.,
Chiocchia, V., Bell, J. L., & Stokes, C. (2020). Study protocol: NeoCLEAR:
Neonatal Champagne Lumbar punctures Every timeÐAn RCT: a multicentre,
randomised controlled 2$\times$ 2 factorial trial to investigate techniques to
increase lumbar puncture success. BMC Pediatrics, 20(1), 1Ð10.
McDermott, M. M.,
& Newman, A. B. (2020). Preserving clinical trial integrity during the
coronavirus pandemic. Jama, 323(21), 2135Ð2136.
McDermott, M. M.,
& Newman, A. B. (2021). Remote research and clinical trial integrity during
and after the coronavirus pandemic. Jama, 325(19), 1935Ð1936.
McDermott, M. M.,
Spring, B., Tian, L., Treat-Jacobson, D., Ferrucci, L., Lloyd-Jones, D., Zhao,
L., Polonsky, T., Kibbe, M. R., & Bazzano, L. (2021). Effect of
low-intensity vs high-intensity home-based walking exercise on walk distance in
patients with peripheral artery disease: The LITE randomized clinical trial. JAMA,
325(13), 1266Ð1276.
Meyer, R. D.,
Ratitch, B., Wolbers, M., Marchenko, O., Quan, H., Li, D., Fletcher, C., Li,
X., Wright, D., & Shentu, Y. (2020). Statistical issues and recommendations
for clinical trials conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic. Statistics in
Biopharmaceutical Research, 12(4), 399Ð411.
Molenberghs, G.,
& Kenward, M. (2007). Missing data in clinical studies. John Wiley
& Sons.
Organization, W. H.
(2020). Novel Coronavirus (__ 2019-nCoV)__: Situation report, 11.
Rubio-San-Sim—n, A.,
AndrŽ, N., Cefalo, M. G., Aerts, I., Casta–eda, A., Benezech, S., Makin, G.,
van Eijkelenburg, N., Nysom, K., & Marshall, L. (2020). Impact of COVID-19
in paediatric early-phase cancer clinical trials in Europe: A report from the
Innovative Therapies for Children with Cancer (ITCC) consortium. European
Journal of Cancer, 141, 82Ð91.
Wolkewitz, M., & Puljak, L.
(2020). Methodological challenges of analysing COVID-19 data during the
pandemic. BMC medical research methodology, 20(1),
81.