Electronic Diaries: Impact on Drug Development

Electronic Diaries: Impact on Drug Development Saul Shiffman, Ph.D. Chief Science Officer invivodata, inc. Advisory Committee for Pharmaceutical Science 19-20 October, 2004

Outline • 25% of clinical trials use patient diaries • Paper diaries • Slow completion of clinical trials • Fail to meet FDA data standards • Electronic diaries • Enhance efficiency and speed trials • Meet FDA data standards • Allow smaller, more efficient studies • FDA can meet the goals of Critical Path Initiative by: • Applying standards for data quality to all diaries • Removing doubt about acceptance of electronic diary data

Collected in 78% of Phase I-IV trials • DataEdge, 1994; RB Webber • Included in 31% of approved NDAs • 1997-2001; Willke, Burke, & Erickson, 2002 • Diaries used in ~ 25% of trials (Phase II-IV) • DataEdge, 1998-1999 Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs) • Subjective states • e.g., pain, dizziness • Symptoms observed by the patient • e.g., asthma attacks, bowel movements

Paper Diaries: Inefficient, Poor Data Quality • Paper diaries • Up to 80% of paper diary cards contain significant errors (Quinn et al., 2000) • Slows database lock • eDiary • 98% reduction in data cleaning • Efficient data management • On-line data edits • Accelerated data lock: • eDiaries: 1 day after LPO • Paper diaries: 4+ weeks after LPO

Paper: Apparent Compliance Based on patient time/date entries Stone et al, BMJ, 2002 Stone et al, CCT, 2003

Paper: Test / Verify Apparent Compliance Verify patient-entered completion times

Paper: Actual Compliance Based on instrumented paper diary Observed back-filling, hoarding, forward-filling Stone et al, BMJ, 2002 Stone et al, CCT, 2003

eDiary: Actual Compliance Based on electronic time stamp Stone et al, BMJ, 2002 Stone et al, CCT, 2003

Contribution of eDiary toClinical Development Efficiency • Decreases error • Avoidance of back-filling, faked data • Yields more definitive indication of drug effects • Increased power • Lower error rate • Compared similar studies with paper diary vs. eDiary

Reduced Noise, Increased Validity = More Efficient Clinical Development eDiaries yielded (McKenzie et al, 2004; Pearson et al, 2004): • 33% reduction in variability = • 50% reduction in sample size • Smaller trials • Fewer Trials More efficient, faster, cheaper clinical development

Science, Technology & Regulation are In Place & Proven • Science: Improves validity, enhances power; >100 published studies • Technology: Over 18 years field experience in clinical research • Regulation: ALCOA, predicate rules • Approved NDA (Allergan Acular LS)

What Is Needed? • Apply data quality regulations consistently to paper and eDiary data • Promote adoption of modern, efficient, scientifically valid methods for collection of PROs • Make clear statement RE: acceptance of electronic diary data (remove FUD)

Conclusions • Paper diaries • Slow completion of clinical trials • Fail to meet FDA data standards • Electronic diaries • Enhance efficiency and speed trials • Meet FDA data standards • Allow smaller, more efficient studies • FDA can meet the goals of Critical Path Initiative by: • Applying standards for data quality to all diaries • Removing doubt about acceptance of electronic diary data

Reporting Platforms Innovation “That it will ever come into general use, notwithstanding its value, is extremely doubtful because its beneficial application requires much time and gives a good bit of trouble, both to the patient and to the practitioner because its hue and character are foreign and opposed to all our habits and associations.” The Source: The London Times, 1834 The Subject: The Stethoscope

ALCOA and Diaries * April 1999 FDA Guidance for Computerized Systems Used in Clinical Trials

Electronic Diaries: Impact on Drug Development