Parkinson's Clinical Trial Companion Accelerating Clinical Trials | Page 17

Site Selection The number and type of procedures, as well as the variation in recruitment target population, made the S4 research protocol highly complex. The S4 Steering Committee was aware that this complexity was a potential barrier to successful study implementation and determined that careful selection of clinical sites would help to mitigate this issue. To enhance the site selection process, the S4 Steering Committee: 1) identified and prioritized site level characteristics necessary for study implementation; 2) developed a checklist to evaluate sites in person; and 3) conducted in-person site visits. greater success in recruitment and reduced trial delays. This information was assessed by asking invited clinical sites to complete a site interest form. The forms were then evaluated and prioritized by the S4 Steering Committee. + + Identified and Prioritized Site-Level Characteristics The characteristics identified by the S4 team as most critical to study implementation were: – – Site personnel experience in implementing clinical studies that involve collecting biospecimens – – Site-level infrastructure – – Access to the population(s) of interest Each of these characteristics addressed an area of complexity in the research protocol. Experienced site personnel provided additional confidence around the ability to conduct study procedures that were both precise and invasive. Strong site infrastructure ensured that samples were collected in a standardized manner and mitigated concerns around data quality. Access to the population(s) of interest ensured + + Developed an Evaluation Checklist The S4 Steering Committee created a checklist that was broken out by the three priority characteristics (experience, site-level infrastructure and access to the population of interest). Within these categories, specific criteria were listed that provided a measure of how well the site ranked on that characteristic (level of experience, type of equipment, access to storage, etc.). (For more information on this checklist, email [email protected].) + + Conducted In-person Site Visits S4 Steering Committee members visited each of the sites under consideration based on their responses to the site interest form and, using the checklist, evaluated them on the priority characteristics. Sites were selected to participate in the S4 study if they adequately met the criteria for participation, including documented experience collecting biospecimens from a PD population, site infrastructure requirements (such as collaborations with gastroenterologists and ear nose and throat specialists) and recruitment plans for the population of interest. Continued on page 16 Table 2. Procedure Completion Rates, S4 Total Enrolled, N Blood Sample, N (%) CSF Sample, N (%) Saliva Sample, N (%) Skin Sample, N (%) Colon Sample, N (%) Gland Sample, N (%) Evaluable Subjects* Early PD 20 19(95%) 16 (80%) 18 (90%) 18 (90%) 19 (95%) 18 (90%) 18 (90%) Moderate PD 20 20 (100%) 18 (90%) 20 (100%) 20 (100%) 20 (100%) 20 (100%) 20 (100%) Advanced PD 21 21 (100%) 20 (95%) 19 (90%) 21 (100%) 21 (100%) 18 (86%) 21 (100%) Healthy Controls 21 21 (100%) 21 (100%) 21 (100%) 21 (100%) 21 (100%) 20 (95%) 21 (100%) TOTAL 82 81 (99%) 75 (91%) 78 (95%) 80 (98%) 81 (99%) 76 (93%) 80 (98%) *Evaluable defined as having contributed at least two out of three biofluids and two out of three biopsies Chapter 2 — Assessing Opportunities and Challenges 15