An Examination of eClinical Technology Usage and CDISC Standards Adoption

Abstract

Background:

The Tufts Center for the Study of Drug Development (Tufts CSDD) collaborated with the Clinical Data Interchange Standards Consortium (CDISC) on a joint working group study with 10 participating companies including biopharmaceutical, CROs, and eClinical technology vendors. The objective of the study was to examine current and projected use of eClinical technology and standards across respondent organizations and in clinical studies and to gather perceptions and attitudes about technology and standards adoption.

Methods:

The Tufts CSDD study examined the use of eClinical technology and CDISC standards through a comprehensive survey combined with analyses of clinical study data among biopharmaceutical companies and contract research organizations.

Results:

The results suggest increasing use of specific eClinical technology solutions and standards. The barriers to adoption of eClinical trial tools are addressed as well as the benefits of standards adoption. Differences between respondent perceptions and actual study data are examined, and the survey results are compared with those from prior studies.

Conclusions:

The results of the study indicate that increasing use of standards could translate into improvements in time, costs, and overall approval rates. The study also observed an uptake in the use of eClinical technologies that could potentially create efficiencies and streamline operational processes.

Keywords

eClinical technology CDISC standards integration

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Fierce Biotech IT. The clinical trial technology sector could top $5B by 2018. http://www.fiercebiotechit.com/story/clinical-trial-technology-sector-tipped-top-5b-2018/2014-01-26. Accessed January 20, 2015.

Getz

Kush

. eClinical and Standards Adoption Study. Boston, MA: Tufts Center for the Study of Drug Development; 2007.

Getz

Kaitin

. Why does the industry need a change? In: Schuler

Buckley

, eds. Re-engineering Clinical Trials: Best Practices for Streamlining Drug Development. New York, NY: Elsevier; 2015.

Kaitin

, ed. Large pharma success rates for drugs entering clinical trials in 1993-04: 16%. In: Tufts Center for the Study of Drug Development Impact Report. 2009;11(4).

DiMasi

Grabowski

Hansen

. Cost of developing a new drug [webcast]. Cost study press event. November 18, 2014.

US Food and Drug Administration. Safety and Innovation Act. 2012. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-112publ144/pdf/PLAW-112publ144.pdf. Accessed January 12, 2015.

US Food and Drug Administration. Guidance for Industry: Electronic Source Data in Clinical Investigations. Washington, DC: US Department of Health and Human Services; 2013.

US Food and Drug Administration. Guidance for Industry: Providing Regulatory Submissions in Electronic Format—Submissions Under Section 745A(a) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. Washington, DC: US Department of Health and Human Services; 2014.

Zink

Mann

. On the importance of a single data standard. Drug Information Journal. 2012;46(3):362–367.

10.

Friggle

Labout

Kush

. CDISC: adoption trends, benefits and addressing barriers. CDISC Journal. 2011;1–17.

11.

Health Level 7 International. http://www.hl7.org/about/index.cfm?ref=nav. Accessed April 7, 2014.

12.

CDISC Clinical Research Glossary Version 7. http://cdisc.org/cdisc-glossary. Accessed January 12, 2015.

13.

CDISC business case. http://cdisc.org/business-case. Accessed February 27, 2015.

14.

Slack

. Electronic submissions and standards, Office of Strategic Programs, US Food and Drug Administration. Presentation to Center for Drug Evaluation and Research Global Forum; June 23, 2014.