Dr. Leen Kawas on Clinical Trial Success

Photo of author
Sponsored Post
doctor-patient

Dr. Leen Kawas, an inventor, leader, and entrepreneur, shared her insights in improving clinical trial and clinical study result applications. She is a pharmacist who has clinical experience, as well as managerial experience. This unique position provides her with insight into just how disconnected the scientific, patient-related, operation, and medical elements of a study really are. She believes that it’s critical to identify and understand all stakeholders in the industry at all stages. In doing so, it may improve the efficacy of any trial. 

The goal is to find a way to ensure data quality and patients are the main focus of a clinical study. Kawas says it’s critical to work collaboratively and innovatively to achieve this and makes several recommendations on how to do so.

Get Patient Input Earlier

One of Dr. Kawas’ core recommendations is to get input from patients early and often during the study protocol development. It’s beneficial to rely on feedback from stakeholders throughout the process, especially at this stage. 

That feedback can become useful in various ways and may help with the study’s design and its decisions. This leads to several benefits. First, it allows for the highest possible quality clinical data and study conduct. This data lays the foundation for the best possible outcome. It also helps to improve patients’ experiences, which helps to ensure that the patients’ needs are being met.

Using this input creates an opportunity for the study to provide clear and concise questions that are relevant to both the disease outcome and the patients themselves. It also helps to provide feedback on the core operational components of the study.

At the core of the process is the patient. To create the study goals and what information the study provides, it is critical to start the process with the patient. That may include not just the individual but also the health care providers and the caregivers. It also means taking into consideration the product and the clinical team. That team includes most of those involved in the process, including clinical operations, clinical sciences, medical and safety, data management, regulatory, and statistics team members.

Fine Tune the Study to Address Needs

The next area of focus, according to Dr. Kawas, is to create unity between all team members. Each of the team members needs a specific emphasis or focus as well. She breaks this down by each person. 

For example, the clinical scientist has a specific goal of creating the hypothesis, then designing a trial that supports the drug’s mechanism or action. This person also is responsible for the pathology of the disease. 

The clinical operations team is responsible for concentrating on the study administration. This helps to ensure there is cohesive focus and a smooth process in place. This team works specifically in accordance with the protocol for the study that has already been created. 

The medical teams have a different but specific focus. Their focus is on the clinical presentation of the disease. They also help to focus on the safety of all of those participating in the study. 

In addition to these positions, the statistician and data scientist work to guide assumptions. They help to oversee the quality of the data and report on any trends that occur during the study’s design, operational conduct, and reporting. 

Each group or person has their own specific tasks but contributes to the shared goal of all parties involved. When there is early and continued communication among these stakeholders, the result is a more favorable study with better information and better results. It can also help create more efficient timelines and eliminate certain study-related expenses. 

Additionally, gathering patient feedback early may improve patient recruitment and retention, which ultimately reduces the need for amendments to the study protocol. 

Focus on Improving Recruitment for Patients in the Study

The use of patient interviews can significantly improve the outcome when it comes to recruitment for a study. Interviews can help to provide better information and a more current understanding of who the ideal patient is. It can also help to complete more thorough interviews with caregivers and healthcare professionals. 

By putting more focus on these interviews and insights, it may be possible to better understand the patient population and implement patient-tailored strategies. This can be helpful in addressing operational challenges early on, which ultimately leads to more effective recruitment outcomes.

A good starting point is to “develop inclusion criteria,” according to Dr. Kawas. This is critical to ensure that the study is realistic. In doing so, she says that everyone participating in and managing a study needs to be open about the challenges they may face and that when those challenges do arise, they must adapt. 

Participants need to appreciate that the environment the study is running in will also impact the characteristics of the population. That includes the approval of new drugs. 

Clinical teams need to anticipate who they need within their study, making a better effort to ensure those in the study are the best possible fit for the outcomes and goals of the study. At the same time, they also have to recognize that there will be mistakes in the process. That is normal and should be expected. As such, they need to be willing to amend the inclusion criteria when needed. When teams take the necessary steps to recognize challenges and then resolve them, it is possible to mitigate the impact these mistakes have on the quality of the study. 

Another component of this need is to encourage drug developers to create study budgets that meet initial needs and are also tailored to recruitment strategies. To do this, they should use all of their tools to formulate inclusion criteria. This budget may include everything from recruitment platforms and applications to television, radio, and social media.

Each of these components contributes to the end result. Patient retention within the study is likely to improve when all participants consider the patient experience early on, Dr. Kawas states. Many times, patients and their families will commit to research if it is going to support finding new therapies and cures for what they are facing. However, dropout rates will increase when the trial itself is simply too demanding and exhausting, or it does not have strategies in place to support caregivers and patients. The importance of mitigating issues that lead to increased dropout rates is obvious, as these rates directly affect the study, the data, and the quality of the results.

The Study Focus Needs to Continue Over Time

Strong study initiation is key to any study’s success. However, it does not mean the hard work on the project is over, and that updates and changes can be pushed to the side. Rather, Dr. Kawas says, the work has just begun at this point.

All stakeholders must work together throughout every stage of the study, including overseeing the project’s operations. They also need to consider how the study impacts the patients and the data quality. 

There are many tools available to support this process, including numerous technologies, allowing stakeholders to build a more seamless, collaborative platform and process. Dr. Kawas claims that the best protocols and studies focus on “addressing clear and concise hypotheses, are operationally feasible and keep patients at the center of the decision-making.”

The end goal is clear – to create effective drugs that help patients live better, healthier, longer lives. To achieve that, groups need to see how important it is to work within a “united and collaborative framework,” says Dr. Kawas. 

About Leen Kawas

Dr. Kawas is the co-founder of M3 Biotechnology, now known as Athira Pharma, where she previously served as CEO and President, and a member of the Board of Directors. She invented ATH-1017, a therapeutic candidate for treating various neurodegenerative diseases, and has developed other drug candidates within the company’s pipeline. 

As of February 2021, Kawas was also one of only 22 female founders and CEOs to lead their company to an initial public offering. In addition, she has received numerous honors and awards throughout her career.

VR is a mess right now with so many companies convinced that collaboration and education over Virtual Reality requires classroom or conference room metaphor to function. But both the classroom and the conference room are constructs based on having to be in the same location physically which is not a requirement for virtual reality where your imagination, not your physical body, define the related construct. Right before the holiday break (in the US we mostly shut down during the last two weeks of the year), I took a briefing from Lenovo’s VR Classroom group and it is the first one in a long time where the approach optimized the tool set and did not try to recreate something that no longer made sense. Let us talk about why Lenovo’s VR Classroom is a better approach to remote education than the more common approach using avatars and virtual classrooms or conference rooms. The Recurring Mistake When we have a disruptive technology change, we tend to take the new technology and force it to do what we did before that technology emerged. The first cars were not only called horseless carriages, but they looked like horse drawn carriages without the horses. So, it is not surprising that so many of the collaboration tools we use try to recreate classrooms, conference rooms, even auditoriums at times failing to realize that every one of those constructs is optimized for physical bodies and defined by the need for everyone to be in the same place to communicate. There is something to be said for familiarity but using a technology that is optimized for people who are remote by faking an in-person event would seem to be suboptimal because physical rooms are limited while our imaginations and the VR technology we are now using have very different limitations and advantages. In addition, when we learn or collaborate the focus should be on either the project we are collaborating about, or the material we are learning. For instance, if we were collaborating on a building would not it make more sense, if we could, to go to the building site and do that work where the building is going rather than in a conference room remote from that site? While expensive and time consuming to do that physically, with a VR solution you can go anyplace instantly, making location learning and collaboration far more interesting and effective. Lenovo’s VR Classroom This is what Lenovo has figured out with their VR Classroom. They created a process where the focus is on the material to be learned and the engagement of the students rather than trying to recreate a virtual classroom. Using the Lenovo Mirage VR S3 headset, which emerged from their partnership with Pico, Lenovo created a comprehensive learning platform that focused students on the content to be learned and does not try to recreate the classroom experience. Using eye tracking teachers can tell whether the students are engaged and refine the related content over time to increase engagement. They can better focus on the content and have reported accelerated learning speeds and less behavioral problems because they can better monitor the students and fine tune the curriculum to provide the desired outcome. Tests are more interactive and focused more on reinforcing knowledge as opposed to the more typical mix of memorization and test taking skills. Training speed, rather than the more typical limitation of being set by the slower students, is more dynamic and designed to move at the rate optimal for any student. This helps both slow and fast students by assuring the slow students are not left behind and the fast students do not disengage out of boredom. While Lenovo’s initial roll out of this program focused on K-12 education exclusively it has since expanded to all levels of schools and includes professional training as well now. The solution is comprehensive as well with hardware, content, device management, and training and support. All these elements are required because teachers and trainers want to focus on the job of teaching, not on having to do their own installation and ongoing service and support. By taking on these burdens, Lenovo allows the teacher/trainer to do what they do best, which is teaching and training. Interesting courses include things like ethical finance, and they can do the avatar thing using Mozilla Hubs if needed for group games and team building activities. But the overall effort is to place the student immersivity into the content to be learned and focusing on the transfer of knowledge, not the recreation of the classroom to speed the learning process. Wrapping up: I think that many of the VR efforts that try to replicate classrooms, conference rooms, and auditoriums are wrong headed because they create artificial limitations on the process based on physical requirements that do not exist in the virtual world. Lenovo’s VR Classroom 2 effort appears to better take into account the capabilities and limitations of VR to craft a far more effective solution. The lesson here is that the best solutions focus first on the problem to be solved using the unique advantages of the new tool and rather than recreating the limitations of the old one. Lenovo’s approach is exactly that, they focused on VR’s ability for immersive learning and the result is a remote solution that is potentially far more effective than the in person process it replaces.

Lenovo’s VR Classroom 2: Doing VR Education Right

How Do Privacy Screen Protectors Work?

key-lock-password-security-privacy-protection-graphic

© 2021 TGDaily | Privacy Policy | About US