Goal 2: Reduce Human Disease

Towards Collaborative Funding of Clinical Trials

A way for clinical trial investigators to submit ONE application with ONE review and ONE funding decision, and the application would ask for funding from multiple funders (e.g. NHLBI and another IC, NHLBI and PCORI, NHLBI and AHA, NHLBI and CIHR, NHLBI and MRC).

Submitted by (@nhlbiforumadministrator)

Is this idea a Compelling Question (CQ) or Critical Challenge (CC)? : Critical Challenge (CC)

Details on the impact of addressing this CQ or CC :

It would be much easier for investigators from multiple sites/countries to secure funding for large-scale trials from multiple sponsors. They would only have to submit ONE application, respond to ONE review, and anticipate ONE funding decision.

Feasibility and challenges of addressing this CQ or CC :

Clinical trials have become increasingly difficult to afford, yet the need for them has never been greater. Many other sponsors (CIHR, PCORI, AHA, MRC, European Union) are eager to work with NHLBI to enable user-friendly multi-sponsor funding. Some similar type arrangements are already happening with other IC's (e.g. NINDS is working with CIHR and the UK MRC).

Large-scale clinical trials often require involvement of multiple sites, often located in > 1 country. Furthermore, the expense of trials often raises questions as to whether funders could collaborate, all contributing a certain amount. However, there is no simple user-friendly way for applicants to bring secure multiple sources of funding. Ideally, the division of funds would be agreed upon prior to application. In case of foreign funders, no monies would cross borders -- i.e. for NHLBI and UK MRC applications, the NHLBI would fund American sites while the UK MRC would fund UK sites, but all funding goes to ONE trial with ONE protocol and ONE data set.

 

One challenge would be politics. Who will do the review? NIH has traditionally acted as if it is the only agency capable to doing a valid review. Would NIH be willing to accept a review conducted by another sponsor? Would other sponsors be willing to accept a review fully run by NIH?

Name of idea submitter and other team members who worked on this idea : NHLBI Staff

Voting

-1 net votes
8 up votes
9 down votes
Active

Goal 3: Advance Translational Research

T4 Translation Research Informing Early Stage Translational Research

There is a need to utilize insights gained from T4 translation research and implementation science to inform the design and execution of early-stage translational research and clinical trials.

Submitted by (@nhlbiforumadministrator)

Is this idea a Compelling Question (CQ) or Critical Challenge (CC)? : Critical Challenge (CC)

Details on the impact of addressing this CQ or CC :

• Assure that early stage translation research will be suitable for implementation in real world setting

• Aligns the research interventions from T1-T3 research to those appropriate to T4 research

• Potential to focus early stage research in key high burden areas

• Provides research community an understanding of the connections from early stage to late stage translation research which will potentially refine research strategies and directions at all levels

Feasibility and challenges of addressing this CQ or CC :

• Promote the importance of translation to population of heart, lung, blood, and sleep researcher to broader research community

• Potential for more T4 research contributions for guiding investment into translation research from T1-T3

• Provide avenues for T1-T3 investigators to translate their ideas into positive outcomes for population health

• Successful T4 research will stimulate feedback loop and identify opportunities for early translation research

Name of idea submitter and other team members who worked on this idea : NHLBI Staff

Voting

3 net votes
13 up votes
10 down votes
Active

Goal 2: Reduce Human Disease

Comparison of CAC-based Strategy versus AHA/ACC Guidelines

There is a need for a randomized primary prevention trial comparing the effectiveness of cholesterol treatment strategies based on a high CAC score versus the AHA/ACC 10-year cardiovascular disease risk tool. Include cost-effectiveness as well as clinical effectiveness as endpoints.

Submitted by (@nhlbiforumadministrator1)

Is this idea a Compelling Question (CQ) or Critical Challenge (CC)? : Critical Challenge (CC)

Details on the impact of addressing this CQ or CC :

Improve targeting of statins to high-risk patients without prior CV disease.

Feasibility and challenges of addressing this CQ or CC :

New guidelines issued last year. Statin and recently ezetimibe are proven to be safe and efficacious.

Name of idea submitter and other team members who worked on this idea : NHLBI Staff

Voting

-8 net votes
4 up votes
12 down votes
Active

Goal 2: Reduce Human Disease

Assessing current methodologies for clinical trials

Are the current methodologies for clinical trials still the best practices for conducting efficient clinical trials?

Submitted by (@nhlbiforumadministrator)

Is this idea a Compelling Question (CQ) or Critical Challenge (CC)? : Compelling Question (CQ)

Name of idea submitter and other team members who worked on this idea : NHLBI Staff

Voting

10 net votes
16 up votes
6 down votes
Active

Goal 3: Advance Translational Research

Using Single Patients for Clinical Trials

To foster the IOM recommendation that every healthcare encounter contribute to a learning healthcare system, would clinical practice structured as N-of-1 trials and documented via EHR/EMR provide strong practice-based evidence?

Submitted by (@nhlbiforumadministrator1)

Is this idea a Compelling Question (CQ) or Critical Challenge (CC)? : Compelling Question (CQ)

Name of idea submitter and other team members who worked on this idea : NHLBI Staff

Voting

-20 net votes
9 up votes
29 down votes
Active

Goal 2: Reduce Human Disease

New models for clinical trials

There is a need to educate the scientific community and program staff about the use of metrics, results-based accountability, and other business models to improve the science, productivity, and efficiency of clinical trials and clinical trial networks.

Submitted by (@nhlbiforumadministrator)

Is this idea a Compelling Question (CQ) or Critical Challenge (CC)? : Critical Challenge (CC)

Details on the impact of addressing this CQ or CC :

Improve the efficiency of clinical trials and a return on research investments

Feasibility and challenges of addressing this CQ or CC :

Yes, this is feasible.

Name of idea submitter and other team members who worked on this idea : NHLBI Staff

Voting

4 net votes
10 up votes
6 down votes
Active

Goal 2: Reduce Human Disease

Cardiometabolic Disease Risks Associated with Sleep Deficiency

How does insufficient sleep duration, irregular timed sleep schedules, and poor sleep quality contribute to the pathophysiology of lung, heart and blood diseases?

Submitted by (@nhlbiforumadministrator)

Is this idea a Compelling Question (CQ) or Critical Challenge (CC)? : Compelling Question (CQ)

Details on the impact of addressing this CQ or CC :

Sleep deficiency and untreated sleep disorders threaten the health of 20-30 percent of US adults through an increased risk of stroke, hypertension, diabetes, inflammatory disease, and all-cause mortality. Developing the scientific evidence-base of validated interventions will enhance the management of cardiometabolic and pulmonary risks to health, present new opportunities for secondary prevention, and reduce associated burden on health care systems.

Feasibility and challenges of addressing this CQ or CC :

Improving sleep health through informed public recognition of decision-relevant science, and relatively low cost therapies for management of sleep disorders are available for immediate assessment of impact in appropriate clinical trials to demonstrate efficacy and effectiveness.

Discovery research advances implicate an array of cellular sleep and circadian mechanisms in pathophysiological pathways leading to cardiometabolic and pulmonary disease.

 

Irregular and disturbed sleep impairs cellular biological rhythm in all tissues and organs leading to oxidative stress, unfolded protein responses, and impaired cell function. The pathophysiological findings juxtaposed with epidemiological evidence of disease risk indicate that sleep deficiency contributes to an erosion of health across the lifespan over and above the effects of aging.

Name of idea submitter and other team members who worked on this idea : NHLBI Staff

Voting

94 net votes
122 up votes
28 down votes
Active

Goal 3: Advance Translational Research

Improving Drug Safety through Precompetitive Research

The lack of transparency in Pharma clinical studies and the incomplete knowledge of the effect of genetic profiles and pharmacological factors on drug toxicities are challenges in decreasing drug development costs and increasing drug safety.

Submitted by (@nhlbiforumadministrator1)

Is this idea a Compelling Question (CQ) or Critical Challenge (CC)? : Critical Challenge (CC)

Details on the impact of addressing this CQ or CC :

Precompetitive research and collaborations directed at improving our understanding of the factors underlying adverse patient responses to investigational heart, lung, blood, sleep drugs will help to expedite the drug development process, increase probabilities of success and reduce product development costs.

Feasibility and challenges of addressing this CQ or CC :

Several public-private initiatives such as The Predictive Safety Testing Consortium and the Cardiac Safety Research Consortium are underway that address components of this problem. NHLBI can join existing initiatives or formulate its own. In either case, NHLBI’s participation as either an honest broker or a funding source will enable substantive progress on several fronts over a 5-10 year period.

Clinical safety complications and chronic exposure toxicities are a major cause of drug trial failures and recalls and thereby contribute to the high cost of pharmaceutical product development and the rising prices of commercial medicines. Safety problems can usually be attributed to the off-target biological effects of drug compounds or their metabolites. Reducing the safety risks associated with drug development will therefore require us to expand our knowledge around the pharmacological and pharmacogenomic factors underlying adverse safety events. Furthermore, adverse events that occur during clinical studies that are conducted by pharmaceutical companies are not usually shared publicly. This lack of transparency contributes to unnecessary inefficiencies and costs in the drug development process.

Mechanisms for minimizing safety hurdles in drug development include funding precompetitive applied research and promoting collaborations among companies to encourage sharing of clinical failure data.

Name of idea submitter and other team members who worked on this idea : NHLBI Staff

Voting

-4 net votes
13 up votes
17 down votes
Active

Goal 3: Advance Translational Research

Advancing the science of translating evidence into practice

What are the best ways for the NHLBI to advance the evolving science of translating robust evidence into clinical practice domestically and globally? How to personalize broad research evidence for individual patients? How to predict and evaluate the impact of evidence-based interventions? How to identify implementation methods available in industry and elsewhere that work best and are most translatable in healthcare? ...more »

Submitted by (@nhlbiforumadministrator)

Is this idea a Compelling Question (CQ) or Critical Challenge (CC)? : Compelling Question (CQ)

Details on the impact of addressing this CQ or CC :

• Reduce mortality and morbidity

• Improved quality of life

• Higher proportion of people receiving evidence-based care and at goal for that care

• Reduced disparities in health and healthcare

Feasibility and challenges of addressing this CQ or CC :

Challenges:

• Lack of research methodology in this area – may need new scientific approaches

 

• Lack of current capacities and capabilities in this area

 

• Current silos that separate research enterprise from industry, as well as NHLBI from other ICs

 

• Divisions between performance of clinical trials and implementation research

 

• Lack of clarity which federal agencies and NIH Institutes are ‘in charge’ of implementation and/or prioritize this as part of their mission and budget

 

• Lack of wide sharing of best practices of other implementation models

 

• Improving the science in this area needs to include methods and metrics development

 

• The accumulated knowledge of clinical trialists and implementation researchers is often not shared

Name of idea submitter and other team members who worked on this idea : NHLBI Staff

Voting

13 net votes
27 up votes
14 down votes
Active

Goal 2: Reduce Human Disease

Metrics to Predict Success of Clinical Trials

What are the metrics that can predict success of clinical trials?

Submitted by (@nhlbiforumadministrator)

Is this idea a Compelling Question (CQ) or Critical Challenge (CC)? : Compelling Question (CQ)

Details on the impact of addressing this CQ or CC :

The ability to identify factors, both ahead of time, and during the trial, that will predict the success of the trial would permit considerable efficiencies for NHLBI. We should be able to select a group of trials that will be able to recruit on time and within budget. For others where there may be less chance of success, we may want to invest time and resources in mentoring the investigators (e.g., in the case of new investigators), or in helping to redesign the trial. This latter function could be especially helpful during the pre-application process.

Feasibility and challenges of addressing this CQ or CC :

NHLBI has developed a critical mass of expertise in portfolio analysis, and is working on developing the IT tools to match. This area was identified as a high priority by the internal IMPACT Task Forces at their recent retreat, so there is also widespread interest in this approach as well.

Name of idea submitter and other team members who worked on this idea : NHLBI Staff

Voting

9 net votes
15 up votes
6 down votes
Active

Goal 2: Reduce Human Disease

New Clinical Research Methodologies for Rare Diseases

What innovative methodologies applicable to small cohorts and rare outcomes can better ensure the success of clinical and implementation studies in the rare diseases affecting heart, lung, blood, and sleep?

Submitted by (@nhlbiforumadministrator)

Is this idea a Compelling Question (CQ) or Critical Challenge (CC)? : Compelling Question (CQ)

Details on the impact of addressing this CQ or CC :

Efficient translation of clinical observation into discovery science, and, particularly, the timely translation of potential therapeutic target identification into the treatment of rare diseases has been impeded by the reality that rare disease populations are often too small to be studied using “classical” epidemiology, clinical trial, and implementation science methodology. Overcoming these barriers will require both the adaptation of current clinical research methods and the development of novel methodologies. The requirement for better methods in rare disease clinical science will become even more urgent with time as systems biology more specifically defines and sub-characterizes ‘common’ heart, lung, blood, and sleep disease populations

Feasibility and challenges of addressing this CQ or CC :

This problem has been recently addressed through special initiatives in the application of small trial methodology into the planning and design of clinical trials in rare hemostatic disorders and sickle cell disease. Furthermore, small clinical trial methodologists have begun to populate the CTSAs and Regulatory Agencies. Their expertise in clinical trial design and biostatistical methods, and their creative ideas can be brought to bear in the clinical trials required to advance NHLBI scientific priorities.

Name of idea submitter and other team members who worked on this idea : NHLBI Staff

Voting

24 net votes
37 up votes
13 down votes
Active

Goal 2: Reduce Human Disease

Risk-benefit of oral hypoglycemic medication in type 2 diabetes

Is an increase in macrovascular endpoints outweighed by the benefit in microvascular end points in new oral type 2 diabetes drugs?

 

It would go against the current regulatory paradigm in type 2 diabetes. Although drug companies do not like the current paradigm, they would prefer to go back to the pre-rosiglitazone state of affairs, in which new drugs had only to prove that they lowered blood glucose and HbA1c.

Submitted by (@nhlbiforumadministrator1)

Is this idea a Compelling Question (CQ) or Critical Challenge (CC)? : Compelling Question (CQ)

Details on the impact of addressing this CQ or CC :

Trials along this line would create a new and more rational paradigm to evaluate the cardiovascular safety of new oral hypoglycemic agents in type 2 diabetes in the context of their incremental benefit in preventing microvascular complications.

Feasibility and challenges of addressing this CQ or CC :

Some of the newer oral meds for treating type 2 diabetes, starting with rosiglitazone, have shown no benefit on clinical macrovascular end points, particularly heart failure. The FDA has responded to this by requiring new drugs to undergo large non-inferiority trials demonstrating that these drugs cause no more than a 30% increase in macrovascular endpoints as a precondition for approval. Yet there is no requirement that microvascular events (renal dysfunction and failure, neuropathy, retinopathy and visual loss) even be documented in these trials. So we are allowing new agents like alogliptin and sitogliptin to be marketed without any direct evidence that they do anything good for patients other than lowering glucose and HbA1c levels and with some evidence of adverse CV effects. While it is reasonable to assume that surrogates like lower glucose and HbA1c will translate to reduction in microvascular events, this assumption is based on old studies using different classes of drugs in a different disease population and environment. Even if HbA1c and glucose remain good qualitative surrogates, there is no way to quantitatively compare benefits versus risks of new hypoglycemic drugs compared to placebo or other drugs. Novel statistical methods to look at weighted composites of microvascular and macrovascular endpoints would enable the key question of net benefit to be addressed with a reasonable sample size.

Name of idea submitter and other team members who worked on this idea : NHLBI Staff

Voting

-7 net votes
9 up votes
16 down votes
Active