CLOSE

Specials

I agree We use cookies on this website to enhance your user experience. By clicking any link on this page you are giving your consent for us to set cookies. More info

Skip to: Curated Story Group 1
lifesciencesreview
US
EUROPE
APAC
CANADA
  • US
    • US
    • EUROPE
    • APAC
    • CANADA
    • LATAM
  • Home
  • Contributors
  • News
  • Conferences
  • Newsletter
  • Whitepapers
  • Magazine
×
#

Life Science Review Weekly Brief

Be first to read the latest tech news, Industry Leader's Insights, and CIO interviews of medium and large enterprises exclusively from Life Science Review

Subscribe

loading

Thank you for Subscribing to Life Science Review Weekly Brief

  • Home
  • Contributers

Recommended Insights

How COVID-19 will Accelerate Digital...

Jakirul Islam, Senior Vice President, Bank Asia

Sterile Processing Professional: 30 Years...

Jackie Mallatt, CRCST, Sterile Processing...

Packaging, A Key Element In Improving...

Bertrand Havrileck, Head of Corporate Pharma R&D,...

Top Biotech Developments to Watch for

Jeremy Williams, Life Science Review

What Role Does Digital Technology Play in...

Jeremy Williams, Life Science Review

Managing Risk and Minimizing the...

Timothy Korwan, Director, New Product Development...

In Personalized Medicine Logistics,...

Scott Ohanesian, Senior VP Commercial Operations,...

Unlock the Power of Data

Jijo James, M.D., M.P.H., Chief Medical Officer,...

How COVID-19 will Accelerate Digital...

Jakirul Islam, Senior Vice President, Bank Asia

Sterile Processing Professional: 30 Years...

Jackie Mallatt, CRCST, Sterile Processing...

Packaging, A Key Element In Improving...

Bertrand Havrileck, Head of Corporate Pharma R&D,...

Top Biotech Developments to Watch for

Jeremy Williams, Life Science Review

What Role Does Digital Technology Play in...

Jeremy Williams, Life Science Review

Managing Risk and Minimizing the...

Timothy Korwan, Director, New Product Development...

In Personalized Medicine Logistics,...

Scott Ohanesian, Senior VP Commercial Operations,...

Unlock the Power of Data

Jijo James, M.D., M.P.H., Chief Medical Officer,...

Incorporating the Patient Voice into Trial Design: Insights Support Recruitment Success

Kelly Franchetti, Vice President, Global Patient Insights and Engagement of ICON plc and Mapi Group
Tweet

The expression “patient-focused drug development” can sound redundant, as, of course, life sciences companies design their products for patients. Still, the patient voice can get lost in the development process when sponsors approach clinical trials from a purely scientific standpoint. Should they neglect to “ensure that patients’ experiences, perspectives, needs, and priorities are captured and meaningfully incorporated into drug development and evaluation,” their assumptions on the acceptability of trial design and the appeal of materials can significantly miss the mark. Such trials can fail to resonate with, or meet the needs of, the targeted patient population.


Avoiding such an outcome by infusing the patient voice into trial planning and operation has become a common theme in life sciences R&D that cuts across geographic regions, phases of development, and therapeutic areas. There are many creative and effective tools and methodologies—beyond focus groups—for digging deep and getting actionable feedback from patients and caregivers.


The Empathetic Workshop


The key to obtaining meaningful insights is to engage patients directly, such as through a workshop, which is one of many robust methodologies that should be designed specifically to address the sponsor’s particular business need. Creative interactivity is essential to drawing out participants. One interactive exercise that has proven effective (and popular with participants) is the “Participation Barometer.” It can be used to gather feedback on critical trial design features, reveal patient preferences related to recruitment methods and communication preferences, determine patient needs related to retention, and better understand patient decision making.


Here’s how it works. Participants are asked to react to statements read aloud to them, such as “I would join the trial, even if there was a chance I’d be on placebo” or “I would be more willing to join the trial if I saw an advertisement online.” Participants then “vote with their feet” by moving to stand under signs posted on the walls labeled “strongly disagree,” “disagree,” “neutral,” “agree,” and “strongly agree.” (See Fig. 1.) Participants then take part in an in-depth discussion of each statement and their vote, a processes that supports the collection of robust qualitative data as well.


Figure 1: Signs Used in the Participation Barometer


This approach has several significant advantages over the traditional focus group format. First, such interactivity and physical movement encourages people to open up and tends to elicit honest answers. Second, it eliminates the “leader of the pack” mentality in which an outspoken participant sways the views of others in the room. During the Participation Barometer exercise, participants are busy moving and are less likely to fall in step with others. And third, participants enjoy it. This has proven to be the favorite activity in Empathy Workshops across patient populations.


The Impact


The combined quantitative and qualitative data gathered from Participation Barometers has been used to influence clinical trial design features, including treatment arms, visit schedules, and inclusion/exclusion criteria.


In one application, patients with a rare form of cancer reacted very negatively in a Participation Barometer to a trial design that included just two arms: one for the investigational drug and one for the placebo. Interestingly, it was not the placebo that they objected to, but rather the lack of other types of chemo as options. In this form of cancer, there was no gold standard treatment, and patients wanted the option of moving across multiple types of therapy as needed. With this insight, the sponsor added other treatment arms to the protocol before sending it to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for final review. This change prevented a basic design decision that might have had disastrous consequences for patient recruitment.


Sponsors who fail to incorporate the voice of the patient into their trial designs and operations risk being disappointed in their recruitment results​


When and How to Gather Patient Insights


Listening to the voice of the patient through Empathetic Workshops takes time, but it need not add to the development timeline if the research is begun at the right time. If the research is to inform the protocol development, researchers should be engaged when the protocol is in a very preliminary, skeletal form so that information gleaned from patients can be used to shape the final design. Empathetic Workshops are also effective once the final protocol is defined, as they can be used to walk through the barriers and challenges, as well as to identify the motivators to participation.


Developing, using, and interpreting effective research with patients and caregivers requires the expertise of a team of specialists, often including clinical specialists, health educators, learning strategists, adult learning designers, and clinical psychologists. Designing empathetic workshops requires the input of all of these specialties, including instructional design experts.


Sponsors who fail to incorporate the voice of the patient into their trial designs and operations risk being disappointed in their recruitment results. The right research, conducted with patients and caregivers, and employed at the right time by professionals can ensure that patients are comfortable with the planned trial and can relate to trial-related materials.


Weekly Brief

loading
Towards a New World Order
> <
  • Clinical Lab Equipment 2023

    Top Vendors

    Current Issue
  • Proteomics 2022

    Top Vendors

    Current Issue
  • Clinical Lab Equipment 2023

    Top Vendors

    Current Issue
  • Proteomics 2022

    Top Vendors

    Current Issue

Read Also

Achieving trial master file quality, timeliness and completeness

Susan K. Maue, Designation : Managing Director PharmaLex

Antibodies: The Building Blocks of Cures

John Armstrong, Head of Research; Head of BD; Global Strategic Programs; Global Straegic Marketing, Galderma

The Dynamic Commercial Aspects of Life Sciences

Jim Cooper, Director, Clinical Operations, Moderna

The Future of Life Sciences Industry

Matthew (Matt) Hewitt, Executive Director, Scientific Solutions C and GT, Charles River

Accelerating Digital Transformation through an Agile, Customer-centric Approach

Mark Mintz, Chief Information Officer at Charles River Laboratories

Re-imagining Learning in a Post-Pandemic World

Sebastian Teo, Head of Learning & Talent Management, Linde

Gene Therapy Clearly Communicated: The Importance of Patient-Centricity, Anan Omnichannel Approach, and Health Literacy

Tara Moroz, PhD Sr. Director, Genetic Medicine and Early Pipeline, Pfizer Inc.

Discovering the Medicines of the Future

Araz Raoof, Senior Vice President Global Drug Discovery & External Innovation at Ferring Pharmaceuticals
Loading...

Copyright © 2023 Life Sciences Review . All rights reserved. |  Subscribe |  About Us follow on linkedin

This content is copyright protected

However, if you would like to share the information in this article, you may use the link below:

https://www.lifesciencesreview.com/cxoinsight/incorporating-the-patient-voice-into-trial-design-insights-support-recruitment-success-nwid-23.html