Processes to Activate Phase III Clinical Trials in a Cooperative Oncology Group: The Case of Cancer and Leukemia Group B

Author:

Dilts David M.1,Sandler Alan B.1,Baker Matthew1,Cheng Steven K.1,George Stephen L.1,Karas Kathleen S.1,McGuire Stephen1,Menon Gourija S.1,Reusch Jason1,Sawyer Debbie1,Scoggins Maren1,Wu Amy1,Zhou Kai1,Schilsky Richard L.1

Affiliation:

1. From the Center for Management Research in Healthcare; Management of Technology Program; Owen Graduate School of Management; Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN; and Cancer and Leukemia Group B, Chicago, IL

Abstract

Purpose National Cancer Institute–sponsored cooperative oncology groups are major sponsors of phase III clinical trials, yet the time and steps required to design and activate such studies has not been well studied. We examine the processes and document the calendar time required to activate such studies opened by the Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB). Methods Setup steps were documented by (1) interviewing CALGB headquarters and statistical center staff and committee chairs to discover the steps required to transit from concept development to final study activation, (2) reviewing procedure manuals, and (3) inspecting all study records, documents, and e-mails to identify any additional steps. Calendar time was collected for each major process. Results Thirteen phase III studies were activated by CALGB during the study period of May 2002 to May 2005. More than 370 distinct processes were required for study activation: 317 work steps, 42 decision points, and 29 processing loops. Sixty-three percent of the decision points were outside CALGB. The complete process map measures 243.5” × 41” in 8-point font. Median calendar days to activate a phase III study at CALGB was 580 days (range, 295 to 1,248 days) from concept approval and 784 days (range, 537 to 1,130 days) from initial conception of the study. Conclusion Setup of a phase III study at a major cooperative oncology group is a complex and lengthy process, with the majority of decision points external to the cooperative group. To improve the activation process, research should to be directed toward both internal and external groups and processes.

Publisher

American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)

Subject

Cancer Research,Oncology

Reference6 articles.

1. Improving the evaluation of new cancer treatments: challenges and opportunities

2. Invisible Barriers to Clinical Trials: The Impact of Structural, Infrastructural, and Procedural Barriers to Opening Oncology Clinical Trials

3. Fukuda H: Infrastructure of cancer clinical trial cooperative groups in western countries [Japanese]. Gan To Kagaku Ryoho 27:1144,2000-1151,

4. Harrington HJ: Business Process Improvement . New York, NY, McGraw-Hill, 1991

5. Gane C, Sarson T: Structured Systems Analysis: Tools and Techniques . Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice-Hall, 1979

Cited by 69 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3