Background: As oral targeted agents, such as ibrutinib, become more widely used understanding the impact of suboptimal dosing on overall and progression-free survival outside of clinical trials is imperative. Methods: Data on ibrutinib discontinuation, dose reductions and treatment interruptions were collected on 170 non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) and chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL n=115, 64%) patients treated with ibrutinib at a single institution. Ibrutinib dose adherence was calculated as the proportion of days in which ibrutinib was administered out of the total number of days ibrutinib was prescribed in the first 8 weeks. Kaplan-Meier curves and log-rank tests were used to compare conditional survival outcomes beyond 8 weeks in patients ≥80% dose adherence and patients <80% dose adherence. Results: Median overall survival among those that discontinued for progression was poor (n=51, 1.7 months, 95%CI 0.3–3.7). Lower dose adherence (<80%) was associated with significantly worse progression-free (p=0.002) and overall survival (p=0.024). However, among CLL patients, lower dose adherence was only associated with worse progression-free survival (p=0.043). Patients with early dose reductions had significant worse PFS (p=0.004) and OS (p=0.014). Patients with dose interruptions lasting > 1 week had worse PFS (p=0.047) but not OS (p=0.577). Conclusion: In this observational study, NHL and CLL patients demonstrated poor outcomes after discontinuing ibrutinib for disease progression. The inferior survival related to suboptimal dose adherence of ibrutinib was predominantly due to early dose reduction. These data confirm poor survival in CLL and lymphoma patients alike after ibrutinib discontinuation and support recommendations for full dose at treatment initiation.

Objective The expanding power and accessibility of personal technology provide an opportunity to reduce burdens and costs of traditional clinical site‐centric therapeutic trials in Parkinson’s disease and generate novel insights. The value of this approach has never been more evident than during the current COVID‐19 pandemic. We sought to (1) establish and implement the infrastructure for longitudinal, virtual follow‐up of clinical trial participants, (2) compare changes in smartphone‐based assessments, online patient‐reported outcomes, and remote expert assessments, and (3) explore novel digital markers of Parkinson’s disease disability and progression. Methods Participants from two recently completed phase III clinical trials of inosine and isradipine enrolled in Assessing Tele‐Health Outcomes in Multiyear Extensions of Parkinson’s Disease trials (AT‐HOME PD), a two‐year virtual cohort study. After providing electronic informed consent, individuals complete annual video visits with a movement disorder specialist, smartphone‐based assessments of motor function and socialization, and patient‐reported outcomes online. Results From the two clinical trials, 226 individuals from 42 states in the United States and Canada enrolled. Of these, 181 (80%) have successfully downloaded the study’s smartphone application and 161 (71%) have completed patient‐reported outcomes on the online platform. Interpretation It is feasible to conduct a large‐scale, international virtual observational study following the completion of participation in brick‐and‐mortar clinical trials in Parkinson’s disease. This study, which brings research to participants, will compare established clinical endpoints with novel digital biomarkers and thereby inform the longitudinal follow‐up of clinical trial participants and design of future clinical trials.

Background: Traditional in-person Parkinson’s disease (PD) research studies are often slow to recruit and place unnecessary burden on participants. The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has added new impetus to the development of new research models. Objective: To compare recruitment processes and outcomes of three remote decentralized observational PD studies with video visits. Methods: We examined the number of participants recruited, speed of recruitment, geographic distribution of participants, and strategies used to enhance recruitment in FIVE, a cross-sectional study of Fox Insight participants with and without PD (n = 203); VALOR-PD, a longitudinal study of 23andMe, Inc. research participants carrying the LRRK2 G2019S variant with and without PD (n = 277); and AT-HOME PD, a longitudinal study of former phase III clinical trial participants with PD (n = 226). Results: Across the three studies, 706 participants from 45 U.S. states and Canada enrolled at a mean per study rate of 4.9 participants per week over an average of 51 weeks. The cohorts were demographically homogenous with regard to race (over 95%white) and level of education (over 90%with more than a high school education). The number of participants living in primary care Health Professional Shortage Areas in each study ranged from 30.3–42.9%. Participants reported interest in future observational (98.5–99.6%) and interventional (76.1–87.6%) research studies with remote video visits. Conclusion: Recruitment of large, geographically dispersed remote cohorts from a single location is feasible. Interest in participation in future remote decentralized PD studies is high. More work is needed to identify best practices for recruitment, particularly of diverse participants.