Recommendations for data monitoring committees from the Clinical Trials Transformation Initiative

Abstract

Background/aimsUse of data monitoring committees to oversee clinical trials was first proposed nearly 50 years ago. Since then, data monitoring committee use in clinical trials has increased and evolved. Nonetheless, there are no well-defined criteria for determining the need for a data monitoring committee, and considerable variability exists in data monitoring committee composition and conduct. To understand and describe the role and function of data monitoring committees, and establish best practices for data monitoring committee trial oversight, the Clinical Trials Transformation Initiative—a public–private partnership to improve clinical trials—launched a multi-stakeholder project.MethodsThe data monitoring committee project team included 16 individuals charged with (1) clarifying the purpose of data monitoring committees, (2) identifying best practices for independent data monitoring committee conduct, (3) describing effective communication practices, and (4) developing strategies for training data monitoring committee members. Evidence gathering included a survey, a series of focus group discussions, and a 2-day expert meeting aimed at achieving consensus opinions that form the foundation of our data monitoring committee recommendations.ResultsWe define the role of the data monitoring committee as an advisor to the research sponsor on whether to continue, modify, or terminate a trial based on periodic assessment of trial data. Data monitoring committees should remain independent from the sponsor and be composed of members with no relevant conflicts of interest. Representation on a data monitoring committee generally should include at least one clinician with expertise in the therapeutic area being studied, a biostatistician, and a designated chairperson who has experience with clinical trials and data monitoring. Data monitoring committee meetings are held periodically to evaluate the unmasked data from ongoing trials, but the content and conduct of meetings may vary depending on specific goals or topics for deliberation. To guide data monitoring committee conduct and communication plans, a charter consistent with the protocol’s research design and statistical analysis plan should be developed and agreed upon by the sponsor and the data monitoring committee prior to patient enrollment. We recommend concise and flexible charters that explain roles, responsibilities, operational issues, and how data monitoring committee recommendations are generated and communicated. The demand for data monitoring committee members appears to exceed the current pool of qualified individuals. To prepare a new generation of trained data monitoring committee members, we encourage a combination of didactic educational programs, practical experience, and skill development through apprenticeships and mentoring by experienced data monitoring committee members.ConclusionOur recommendations address data monitoring committee use, conduct, communication practices, and member preparation and training. Furthermore recommendations form th...

The role of data and safety monitoring boards in implementation trials: When are they justified?

“…A secondary purpose is to protect and preserve data quality in order to safeguard the interests of participants and to produce reliable scientific findings that justify ongoing risk to participants [6]. The DSMB's role in conducting periodic benefit-risk assessments and their authority to recommend trial termination distinguishes them from other research oversight and advisory groups [7].…”

“…Although DSMBs may issue recommendations to improve participant protections and/or improve data quality and trial integrity, trial stoppage decisions are typically based on: (1) individual participant safety concerns; (2) overwhelming benefit; or (3) futility. DSMBs have a unique role in trial monitoring that is different from other oversight groups, for example, institutional review boards, ethics committees, or trial steering committees, in their access to unblinded interim results [7]. One of the earliest DSMBs was established in the late 1960s to monitor the University Group Diabetes Project following concerns about drug safety and adequate monitoring [8].…”

III. The role of the Research Ethics Committees in the regulation of Pharma-Sponsored studies

“…Beyond a thorough review of the research protocol and the informed consent form, the REC should request a monitoring plan, GCP certification of the study members, and means of communicating with the DSMBs when needed. DMSBs are required when a sponsored multicenter trial has mortality or significant morbidity endpoints or severe adverse events (SAEs) are expected with a new or high-risk therapy, or when very little safety data exist before the study, or if vulnerable populations are involved 24 . These bodies are composed of independent researchers, statisticians, ethicists, and community representatives.…”

Detecting fabrication in large-scale molecular omics data

“…The decision to use these forms of oversight and at what frequency is not driven by empirical data but rather is determined by clinics' usual practice (Morrison et al, 2011). The emerging data deluge challenges the effectiveness of traditional auditing practices to detect fraud, and several studies have suggested addressing the issue with improved centralized and independent statistical monitoring (Baigent et al, 2008;George and Buyse, 2015;Calis et al, 2017). However, these recommendations are given chiefly to help ensure the safety and efficacy of the study, not data integrity.…”