CDASH Initiative: Status Update

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
CLINTON W. BROWNLEY AMERICAN UNIVERSITY PH.D. CANDIDATE SEPTEMBER 2, 2009 BRIDGing CDASH to SAS: How Harmonizing Clinical Trial and Healthcare Standards.
Advertisements

Dimitri Kutsenko (Entimo AG)
CDISC Open Source and low-cost Solutions
Status on the Mapping of Metadata Standards
Communicating with Standards Keeping it Simple Pamela Ryley Vertex Pharmaceuticals, Inc. September 29, 2006.
FDA/Industry Statistics Workshop - 29 September 2006
IUFRO International Union of Forest Research Organizations Eero Mikkola The Increasing Importance of Metadata in Forest Information Gathering NEFIS Symposium.
Experience and process for collaborating with an outsource company to create the define file. Ganesh Sankaran TAKE Solutions.
A Coherent and Practical End-to-End Metadata Strategy using Existing Standards and Tools for Clinical Research Stephane AUGER Danone Research, FRANCE.
Protocol Author Process People Technology
What’s New with CDISC Wayne R. Kubick CDISC CTO.
1 PhUSE CDASH2RFD TC May 31, 2013 Gary Walker, Quintiles Rhonda Facile, CDISC.
The Importance of CDASH
SUCCESSFULLY EMBRACING CHANGES TO CDISC STANDARDS Dr. Elke Sennewald Director, Biometrics Operating Standards Group.
Elke Sennewald Berlin, 28 September 2010 CDASH Tutorial.
Healthcare Link Initiatives: Bridging Clinical Research and Healthcare May 29, 2008 Bay Area Users’ Group Landen Bain CDISC Liaison to Healthcare.
Kendle Implementation of Clinical Data Acquisition Standards Harmonization Dr Elke Sennewald Kendle 9th German CDISC User Group Meeting Berlin, 28 September.
An Introduction to Clinical Data Acquisition Standards Harmonization (CDASH) Loryn Thorburn © 2010 PAREXEL International | Confidential.
CDASH Initiative Rhonda Facile Project Director, CDISC CDASH Project Update Atlantic User Group 21 February 2008.
An introduction to CDISC and CDASH Bring on the Standards! Emmanuelle Denis M.Sc., MICR Global Health Clinical Trials Research Programme.
WUSS 2009 CDISC for the Medical Device and Diagnostic Industry: An Update Carey Smoak Team Leader CDISC Device SDTM Sub-team.
Bay Area CDISC Implmentation Network – July 13, 2009 How a New CDISC Domain is Made Carey Smoak Team Leader CDISC SDTM Device Team.
Monika Kawohl Statistical Programming Accovion GmbH Tutorial: define.xml.
CDISC and how Stata can help us implement it
Beyond regulatory submission - Standards Metadata Management Kevin Lee CDISC NJ Meeting at 06/17/2015 We help our Clients deliver better outcomes, so.
© 2011 Octagon Research Solutions, Inc. All Rights Reserved. The contents of this document are confidential and proprietary to Octagon Research Solutions,
ArtClinica Address: 1175 Marlkress Rd, #2632, Cherry Hill, NJ 08034, USAPhone: Fax: ARTClinica.
Vertex and CDISC / MBC / 12March Vertex and CDISC Accomplishments and Strategy 12 March 2008 Lynn Anderson Associate Director Statistical Programming/Biometrics.
ODM-SDTM mapping Nicolas de Saint Jorre, XClinical June 20, 2008 French CDISC User Group Bagneux/Paris © CDISC & XClinical, 2008.
Antje Rossmanith, Roche 14th German CDISC User Group, 25-Sep-2012
CDASh : A Primer and Guide to Implementation
Overview and feed-back from CDISC European Interchange 2008 (From April 21 st to 25 th, COPENHAGEN) Groupe des Utilisateurs Francophones de CDISC Bagneux.
MODULE B: Case Report Forms Jane Fendl & Denise Thwing April 7, Version: Final 07-Apr-2010.
Second Annual Japan CDISC Group (JCG) Meeting 28 January 2004 Julie Evans Director, Technical Services.
SDTM Validation Delaware Valley CDISC user network Ketan Durve Johnson and Johnson Pharmaceutical Reasearch and Development May 11 th 2009.
Dave Iberson-Hurst CDISC VP Technical Strategy
Overview of CDISC standards and use cases along the E2E data management process Dr. Philippe Verplancke ESUG Marlow, UK 27 May 2009.
Clinical Research Data Capture (CRD) IHE Vendor’s Workshop 2008 IHE Quality, Research, and Public Health (QRPH) Jason Colquitt Greenway Medical Technologies.
Diagnostics Clinical Information Management (CIM) Services Field Report: Implementation of CDISC ODM Michael Walter.
Practical Image Management for Pharma Experiences and Directions. Use of Open Source Stefan Baumann, Head of Imaging Infrastructure, Novartis.
1 SDS&ADaM sub-team 28 January 2004 Mineko FUJIMOTO Rieko ICHIHARA Kazue TOMITA Hiroaki MATSUDA.
CDISC©2009 February CDISC INTRAchange Carey Smoak Device Team Leader Li Zheng Submission Data Standards Team Member Thurday, April 2, 2009.
1 CDISC HL7 Project FDA Perspective Armando Oliva, M.D. Office of Critical Path Programs FDA.
1. © CDISC 2014 Stetson Line, Team Lead CDISC Intrachange SDTM Rules Sub-team Update.
© CDISC 2015 Paul Houston CDISC Europe Foundation Head of European Operations 1 CTR 2 Protocol Representation Implementation Model Clinical Trial Registration.
How Good is Your SDTM Data? Perspectives from JumpStart Mary Doi, M.D., M.S. Office of Computational Science Office of Translational Sciences Center for.
Mark Wheeldon, Formedix CDISC UK Network June 7, 2016 PRACTICAL IMPLEMENTATION OF DEFINE.XML.
Submission Standards: The Big Picture Gary G. Walker Associate Director, Programming Standards, Global Data Solutions, Global Data Management.
End-to-End With Standards – A Regulatory Reviewer’s Perspective
Design of Case Report Forms
Paul Houston CDISC Europe Foundation Head of European Operations
Dave Iberson-Hurst CDISC VP Technical Strategy
Monika Kawohl Statistical Programming Accovion GmbH
Practical Implementation of Define.xml
Experience and process for collaborating with an outsource company to create the define file. Ganesh Sankaran TAKE Solutions.
CDM SIAC All Hands Call Rhonda Facile Director, CDASH Project CDISC
Accelerate define.xml using defineReady - Saravanan June 17, 2015.
Beyond regulatory submission - Standards Metadata Management Kevin Lee CDISC NJ Meeting at 06/17/2015 We help our Clients deliver better outcomes, so.
Why use CDISC for trials not submitted to regulators?
MAKE SDTM EASIER START WITH CDASH !
CPT and Disclosure: Connecting Critical Processes
Traceability between SDTM and ADaM converted analysis datasets
Quality Control of SDTM Domain Mappings from Electronic Case Report Forms Noga Meiry Lewin, MS Senior SAS Programmer The Emmes Corporation Target: 38th.
In-Depth Report from Optimizing Data Standards Working Group
CDISC UK Network Jun-16 – Welwyn
To change this title, go to Notes Master
CPT and Disclosure: Connecting Critical Processes
Carolina Mendoza-Puccini, MD
Reportnet 3.0 Database Feasibility Study – Approach
Database Lock to DSMB Meeting Pushing a button well takes 2-4 weeks
Presentation transcript:

CDASH Initiative: Status Update Bay Area CDISC Implementation Network Meeting - May 29, 2008 Rhonda Facile, Project Director, CDISC Dorothy B. Dorotheo, InterMune Mark Wheeldon, Formedix

Snapshot Overview CDASH Purpose & Scope Who Participated in CDASH How CDASH Developed? CDASH Domains – Where are we? CDASH Domains – New Ideas CDASH Variable Metadata CDASH Core Designations Practical Implementation of CDASH within CDISC ODM CDASH Goals

Snapshot Critical Path Opportunity #45 – Streamline data collection at investigative sites. Continuation of ACRO’s Initiative Started October 2006 Supported by a Collaborative Group of 17 organizations Core team of 15 members manages.. 11 working groups Groups with between 8-40 volunteers ~190 work group volunteers + additional reviewers (both nationally and internationally) 16 Safety data domains developed.. organized in 4 “Packages” Draft consolidated document now out for public review – April 2008

CDASH Purpose & Scope To develop a set of ‘content standards’ (element name, definition, metadata) for a basic set of global industry-wide data collection fields that support clinical research. The initial scope - ‘safety data/domains’. These safety domains cut across all therapeutic areas (TA independent). Follow CDISC Operating Procedure for Standards Development (COP-001).

Who Participated in CDASH? Team membership: Statisticians Medical Monitors/Clinical Scientists Regulatory Affairs Drug Safety Data Managers Clinical Study Coordinators Clinical Research Associates Investigators Clinical Program Managers Statistical Programmers Database programmers More multi-national input welcome. Participants in the CDASH Initiative Other = Academic Research Organizations, Government (NIH, NCI), Hospitals, Universities.

How was CDASH Developed? Start with Study Data Tabulated Model (SDTM) Focus on CRF Content, not CRF Layout Refer to ACRO CRF Samples (where available) Collect CRF samples Evaluate commonalities/differences of CRF samples Document data points included/excluded with justifications

How was CDASH Developed? Agree on basic data collection fields Map to SDTM Terminology - proposals shared with the Terminology Team Write definitions and completion instructions for clinical site and Sponsors Proceed to the next step in the Consensus Process

CDASH Domains – Where we are Package-1: AE CM DM SC Started Oct 06 Package 3: DA EX CO DV DS Started Mar 07 Package-2: IE MH SU PE VS Started Dec 06 Package-4: LB EG Started Jul 07 Consensus (Initial) Version Harmon- ized Released (Production) 1.0 Review TLC Collaborative Group OK Public Published & Out for Public Review – April 2008

CDASH Variable Metadata Question text for collection on the CRF. How to implement the CRF data collection variable Describes the purpose of the data collection field SDTM-IG conforming variable name (CDASH variables shaded) Aka CRF Completion Instructions CDASH Core Designations

CDASH Core Designations Highly Recommended A data collection field that should be on the CRF (e.g., a regulatory requirement (if applicable)). (e.g. Adverse Event Term) Recommended/Conditional A data collection field that should be collected on the CRF for specific cases (may be recorded elsewhere in the CRF or from other data collection sources). (e.g. AE Start Time) Optional A data collection field that is available for use if needed. (e.g. Were there any AE Experienced?) In SDTM, there are also 3 categories, REQUIRED, EXPECTED & PERMISSIBLE The two standards initiatives do not have same purpose/goal: SDTM is for submission, and CDASH is for data collection. There is not a one to one match in most cases. Highly recommended —fields that really need to be collected; basic fields that are or need to be collected on a CRF Recommended/conditional —collected on the CRF for specific cases e.g. collecting time for precision like in a phase 1 study when patients are confined in the study unit and it is impt. in analysis or it may be derived from other fields…less strong a recommendation Optional —a fields available for your use if your protocol needs it.

CDASH Domain – New Ideas Physical Examination (PE) Use PE form to record only whether or not exam was done Instruct Sites to record, Baseline Abn.: MH, Targeted MH or Baseline Conditions CRFs. Post baseline abn. or baseline conditions that worsened on AE CRF Inclusion/Exclusion (IE) Use IE form to collect only the criterion or criteria NOT MET for Inclusion/Exclusion criteria

CDASH Domain – New Ideas Protocol Deviations (DV) Avoid creating a protocol Deviations CRF because this information can often be derived from other CRF domains or system functionalities. Comments (CO) Avoid the creation of a General Comments CRF which collects unsolicited comments.

“Practical Implementation of Clinical Data Acquisition Standards (CDASH) in the CDISC Operational Data Model” Mark Wheeldon, CEO, Formedix Bay Area User Group, 29th May, 2008

Who are we? Involved with Standards since 2001 All our solutions are based on Open CDISC Standards CDISC Products and Consultancy Company Planning, Preparation and Implementation CDISC Services Products so you can use CDISC in house! Product Focus is on Study Specification and Design Tools Origin™ authoring tools to streamline Protocol to Submission Process Database Specification uses CDISC Operational Data Model Origin Study Modeller™ Submission Specification uses CDISC Define.xml Origin Submission Modeller™ Must work with and around existing processes/technologies Operational Data Model for EDC auto generation Existing internal analysis and reporting structures New or existing extract, transfer and load tools

How could CDASH be used today? Use as a Content Standard Off the shelf Case Report Form content Describes relationship between Operational Data and Submission Datasets CDASH represented within a proprietary file format Excel, Word, Proprietary EDC system format Potentially unstructured Use within Machine Readable Metadata CDASH represented in CDISC Operational Data Model Vendor neutral system independent format Hierarchical structure is ideal for re-usable library of Components

Benefits of using CDASH within the CDISC Models Library Development CDASH forms represented in CDISC Database Standard Safety Domains in CDISC Submission Standard Study Specification Using CDISC metadata to reduce study set-up time Automation of Electronic Data Capture Build Using CDISC ODM to reduce study build times Optimize Downstream Dataflow Operational data to submission Reduces mapping complexity Makes mappings re-usable

What is a CDASH-ODM Form Composed Of?

What is CDASH? What is it Not? Content Standard NOT a Model Database Variable Name, Definition, Question Text Instructions to the Site, SDTM Variable Mapping Core Designations is a killer feature Give clinical context on why something is collected Highly Recommended, Recommended/Conditional, Optional Clinical Perspective on data collection What is it not? One to one mapping with the SDTM AEYN not in SDTM AEBODSYS not in CDASH

ODM Building Blocks How does CDASH Relate? Clinical Database Variable Name Controlled Terminology CDASH CRF Label/Question CDASH Core (Highly Recommended)

CDASH Adverse Event Form in ODM No more hand building of this…

A Dedicated Authoring Environment for Each Standard… Origin Study Modeller™ Origin Submission Modeller™

Role Centric Visualizations – Clinician’s eCRF

Role Centric Visualizations – Data Manager’s Tabular Specification

Multi-Vendor Visualizations – PhaseForward

Multi-Vendor Visualizations - Medidata

Multi-Vendor Visualizations - Paper

Optimal Solution from Standardized Content to any EDC System I have an alternative to this diagram – this is new. Good because it brings in libraries ……

Optimizing Downstream Dataflows CDASH vs. Non CDASH Form Differences 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6

Optimizing Downstream Dataflows CDASH vs Non CDASH SDTM Differences 1 1 5 4 5 4 6 6 2 2 3 3

Conclusions CDASH-ODM Delivers Today Library Development CDASH brings clinical perspective CDASH links to SDTM to bring a submission perspective Quickly settle disputes over content Streamline Study Set-up and EDC Build Process Eliminate manual study specification Study Spec from 492 hrs down to 158 hrs (3x shorter) 30-40% build time reductions Downstream Raw Data to Submission Dataflow Optimisation Consistency between Operational Data and Submitted Datasets Reduction in mapping complexity – quick to create Mappings easier to maintain

CDASH Goals Finalize and Post CDASH final draft for public review CDASH Roadshow & Training program. Finalize and Post CDASH V. 1.0 on CDISC.org. Develop and Publish CDASH-ODM metadata Establish subgroup, Scope, Deliverables, Participants and Timelines Identify and Collect feedback from “Early Implementers” “CDASH” New SDTM Domains as required.

Strength through collaboration. PLEASE VOLUNTEER!!! 32 32