Blog Layout

Implementation of the NCI’s National Clinical Trials Network

The National Cancer Institute is launching a new clinical trials research network intended to improve treatment for the more than 1.6 million Americans diagnosed with cancer each year. The new system, NCI’s National Clinical Trials Network (NCTN), will facilitate the rapid initiation and completion of cancer clinical trials based on improvements in data management infrastructure, the development of a standardized process for prioritization of new studies, consolidation of its component research groups to improve efficiency, and the implementation of a unified system of research subject protection at over 3,000 clinical trials sites. Grants to fund the program will be awarded early in the spring of 2014.

Despite its solid record of accomplishment, the individual components of the NCI’s previous national clinical trials program (the Cooperative Groups) had become less efficient, necessitating changes to several of its operating procedures over the past decade. A 2010 report from the Institute of Medicine (see http://iom.edu/Reports/2010/A-National-Cancer-Clinical-Trials-System-for-the-21st-Century-Reinvigorating-the-NCI-Cooperative.aspx ) validated and refined the nature of the changes that needed to be undertaken. The Institute of Medicine suggested four overarching goals to guide improvement efforts:

  • Improving the speed and efficiency of the design, launch, and conduct of clinical trials
  • Making optimal use of scientific innovations
  • Improving selection, prioritization, support, and completion of clinical trials
  • Fostering expanded participation of both patients and physicians.

In particular, recommendations from the Institute of Medicine and others stressed that it was important for NCI to consolidate its late-phase clinical trials program into a smaller number of groups, each with greater capabilities and appropriate incentives to promote better overall system integration and cooperation. Those recommendations led NCI to develop the new NCTN, focusing on four overarching goals that will guide the new system: integration, prioritization, efficiency, and innovation. 

The NCTN features many changes that will enhance national cancer clinical trials research activities, specifically:

  • The new system will use a single, common IT data management system (called Medidata RAVE) for all trials, facilitating participation by member sites in all studies, irrespective of the NCTN organization leading the trial. The uniformity of a single clinical trials system used by all of the members of the network will aid in the rapid development and conduct of studies as well as analysis of clinical trial findings. 
  • The NCI Central Institutional Review Board (CIRB) will be expanded to cover studies conducted by the entire system, which should help sites open more trials. Previously, individual sites had to conduct their own ethics review. Having a single, centralized ethics review conducted by the NCI CIRB will harmonize the system, thereby lowering cost, time, and personnel needed for ethics review. 
  • Tumor specimen banks and the informatics systems that will allow for the banks to be efficiently integrated have both been redesigned so that they can be used more efficiently in support of the development of predictive molecular tests to guide treatment decisions for patients.

“The new network represents an unmatched effort to integrate and streamline the process of cancer clinical trials research,” said James Doroshow, M.D., deputy director for clinical and translational research at NCI. “The conduct of NCI-supported trials, which are publicly funded, involves a complex system of designing, reviewing, and initiating studies. The new NCTN replaces a structure that was more than 55 years old.” 

NCTN employs an inclusive process for generating studies and conducting clinical trials using broad representation from the oncology field, including academic researchers, as well as professional organizations, patients, and advocates. In particular, community-based clinical trials play an important role in expanding the implementation of research findings to encompass all phases of cancer care delivery. A new system to support clinical trials research in the community setting, the NCI Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP), which will play a critical, complementary role to the NCTN, is being launched later this year and will involve both cancer treatment and cancer care delivery research.

The NCTN will focus on phase 3 trials, the gold standard for establishing new treatments.  It is anticipated that grant support for the NCTN program could be in the range of $150 million per year with additional funds for central administrative support made available through other NCI support contracts and grant programs.

Following the results of peer review, four adult Network groups and one pediatric group, each with its own operations and statistical centers, will be funded. The new Network groups will be engaged in closely knit collaborations to study and evaluate new cancer treatments and advanced approaches to imaging. By comparison, the former program contained nine adult groups, each with its own administrative and statistical centers. The NCTN will also include a Canadian group in the Network as NCI has had long-standing collaborations with Canadian investigators in clinical trials.

Lead Academic Participating Site (LAPS) grants, created specifically for the NCTN, target many of NCI’s designated Cancer Centers. LAPS will provide scientific leadership in development and conduct of clinical trials in association with the adult clinical trial groups. The LAPS will receive increased funding because of higher patient enrollment costs, but must maintain a high performance standard in patient accrual. About 30 LAPS will work together with one or more of the new NCTN adult groups, expanding the reach of the network. 

One important outcome of this new Network will be the ability to facilitate the conduct of trials in rare tumors where patient accrual has always been very difficult. The availability of a national network of clinical trials sites to locate and enroll patients with unusual cancers should enhance the feasibility of conducting such studies. Also, as more cancers are molecularly defined and classified into smaller subsets, the new network structure will support the molecular screening studies needed to define and locate the smaller groups of patients who might be eligible for such studies.

“NCTN investigators are better poised than ever to address the most critical clinical research questions,” said Jeff Abrams, M.D., associate director of NCI’s Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program. “Employing the newly revitalized and efficient NCTN, scientists can conduct trials concentrating on specific cancers, specific populations, or particular methods, such as genetic screening of tumors, imaging, radiation, and surgery.”


Share this Article with others

08 Mar, 2024
The aims of our case-control study were (1) to develop an automated 3-dimensional (3D) Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) for detection of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDA) on diagnostic computed tomography scans (CTs), (2) evaluate its generalizability on multi-institutional public data sets, (3) its utility as a potential screening tool using a simulated cohort with high pretest probability, and (4) its ability to detect visually occult preinvasive cancer on prediagnostic CTs.
08 Mar, 2024
Cancer Mutations Converge on a Collection of Protein Assemblies to Predict Resistance to Replication Stress
08 Mar, 2024
International cancer registries make real-world genomic and clinical data available, but their joint analysis remains a challenge. AACR Project GENIE, an international cancer registry collecting data from 19 cancer centers, makes data from >130,000 patients publicly available through the cBioPortal for Cancer Genomics (https://genie.cbioportal.org). For 25,000 patients, additional real-world longitudinal clinical data, including treatment and outcome data, are being collected by the AACR Project GENIE Biopharma Collaborative using the PRISSMM data curation model. Several thousand of these cases are now also available in cBioPortal. We have significantly enhanced the functionalities of cBioPortal to support the visualization and analysis of this rich clinico-genomic linked dataset, as well as datasets generated by other centers and consortia. Examples of these enhancements include (i) visualization of the longitudinal clinical and genomic data at the patient level, including timelines for diagnoses, treatments, and outcomes; (ii) the ability to select samples based on treatment status, facilitating a comparison of molecular and clinical attributes between samples before and after a specific treatment; and (iii) survival analysis estimates based on individual treatment regimens received. Together, these features provide cBioPortal users with a toolkit to interactively investigate complex clinico-genomic data to generate hypotheses and make discoveries about the impact of specific genomic variants on prognosis and therapeutic sensitivities in cancer.
08 Mar, 2024
The majority of disease-associated variants identified through genome-wide association studies are located outside of protein-coding regions. Prioritizing candidate regulatory variants and gene targets to identify potential biological mechanisms for further functional experiments can be challenging. To address this challenge, we developed FORGEdb, a standalone and web-based tool that integrates multiple datasets, delivering information on associated regulatory elements, transcription factor binding sites, and target genes for over 37 million variants. FORGEdb scores provide researchers with a quantitative assessment of the relative importance of each variant for targeted functional experiments.
By Bo Zhang 08 Mar, 2024
Cancer is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. While progress has been made in the diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment of cancer patients, individualized and data-driven care remains a challenge. Artificial intelligence (AI), which is used to predict and automate many cancers, has emerged as a promising option for improving healthcare accuracy and patient outcomes. AI applications in oncology include risk assessment, early diagnosis, patient prognosis estimation, and treatment selection based on deep knowledge. Machine learning (ML), a subset of AI that enables computers to learn from training data, has been highly effective at predicting various types of cancer, including breast, brain, lung, liver, and prostate cancer. In fact, AI and ML have demonstrated greater accuracy in predicting cancer than clinicians. These technologies also have the potential to improve the diagnosis, prognosis, and quality of life of patients with various illnesses, not just cancer. Therefore, it is important to improve current AI and ML technologies and to develop new programs to benefit patients. This article examines the use of AI and ML algorithms in cancer prediction, including their current applications, limitations, and future prospects. Lead Author: Bo Zhang
By Claudio Luchini 08 Mar, 2024
Artificial intelligence (AI) is concretely reshaping the landscape and horizons of oncology, opening new important opportunities for improving the management of cancer patients. Analysing the AI-based devices that have already obtained the official approval by the Federal Drug Administration (FDA), here we show that cancer diagnostics is the oncology-related area in which AI is already entered with the largest impact into clinical practice. Furthermore, breast, lung and prostate cancers represent the specific cancer types that now are experiencing more advantages from AI-based devices. The future perspectives of AI in oncology are discussed: the creation of multidisciplinary platforms, the comprehension of the importance of all neoplasms, including rare tumours and the continuous support for guaranteeing its growth represent in this time the most important challenges for finalising the ‘AI-revolution’ in oncology. First Author: Claudio Luchini,
By Panayiotis Petousis, PhD 08 Mar, 2024
In the United States, end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) is responsible for high mortality and significant healthcare costs, with the number of cases sharply increasing in the past 2 decades. In this study, we aimed to reduce these impacts by developing an ESKD model for predicting its occurrence in a 2-year period.  Lead Author: Panayiotis Petousis, PhD
By Evan D. Muse 08 Mar, 2024
Transforming the cardiometabolic disease landscape: Multimodal AI-powered approaches in prevention and management Lead Author: Evan D. Muse
By Danielle S. Bitterman, MD 08 Mar, 2024
Current status and future applications of LLMs for cancer symptom management and call for cross-disciplinary collaboration that centers the needs of patients and caregivers L ead Author: Danielle S. Bitterman, MD
01 Mar, 2023
New computer systems aim to peer inside our heads—and to help us fix what they find there In the nineteen-sixties, Joseph Weizenbaum, a computer scientist at M.I.T., created a computer program called Eliza. It was designed to simulate Rogerian therapy, in which the patient directs the conversation and the therapist often repeats her language back to her: U ser : My boyfriend made me come here. E liza : Your boyfriend made you come here. U ser : He says I’m depressed much of the time. E liza : I am sorry to hear you are depressed. U ser : It’s true. I am unhappy. E liza : Do you think coming here will help you not to be unhappy? Weizenbaum made Eliza as satire. He doubted that computers could simulate meaningful human interaction. He was alarmed, therefore, when many people who tried the program found it both useful and captivating. His own secretary asked him to leave the room so that she could spend time alone with Eliza. Worse, doctors saw it as a potentially transformative tool. “Several hundred patients an hour could be handled by a computer system designed for this purpose,” three psychiatrists wrote in The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, in 1966. “The human therapist, involved in the design and operation of this system, would not be replaced, but would become a much more efficient man since his efforts would no longer be limited to the one-to-one patient-therapist ratio as now exists.” Weizenbaum became an outspoken critic of artificial intelligence. “But the genie was out of the bottle,” Brian Christian, who chronicled the episode in his book “The Most Human Human,” told me. A few years later, a Stanford psychiatrist named Kenneth Colby created Parry, a program that attempted to simulate the language of a person with paranoid schizophrenia, to train students before they cared for real patients. Psychiatrists given transcripts of therapy sessions often couldn’t tell the difference between Parry and humans; in this narrow sense, the chatbot passed the Turing test. In 1972, Parry and Eliza met up for a therapy session: P arry : Do you know anything about bookies? E liza : What makes you think I know anything about bookies? P arry : A bookie didn’t pay me off once. E liza : What does that suggest to you? P arry : I beat up the bookie who did not pay off, and I thought he might use his friends in the underworld to get even with me.  Over time, programmers developed Jabberwacky, Dr. Sbaitso, and alice (the Artificial Linguistic Internet Computer Entity). Exchanges with these chatbots were often engaging, sometimes comical, and occasionally nonsensical. But the idea that computers could serve as human confidants, expanding therapy’s reach beyond the limits of its overworked practitioners, persisted through the decades. In 2017, Alison Darcy, a clinical research psychologist at Stanford, founded Woebot, a company that provides automated mental-health support through a smartphone app. Its approach is based on cognitive behavioral therapy, or C.B.T.—a treatment that aims to change patterns in people’s thinking. The app uses a form of artificial intelligence called natural language processing to interpret what users say, guiding them through sequences of pre-written responses that spur them to consider how their minds could work differently. When Darcy was in graduate school, she treated dozens of hospitalized patients using C.B.T.; many experienced striking improvements but relapsed after they left the hospital. C.B.T. is “best done in small quantities over and over and over again,” she told me. In the analog world, that sort of consistent, ongoing care is hard to find: more than half of U.S. counties don’t have a single psychiatrist, and, last year, a survey conducted by the American Psychological Association found that sixty per cent of mental-health practitioners don’t have openings for new patients. “No therapist can be there with you all day, every day,” Darcy said. Although the company employs only about a hundred people, it has counseled nearly a million and a half, the majority of whom live in areas with a shortage of mental-health providers. Link to original article on The New Yorker
Share by: