A framework for clinical and translational research in the era of rigor and reproducibility.

Chris Wichman, Lynette M Smith, Fang Yu
Author Information
  1. Chris Wichman: Department of Biostatistics, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE.
  2. Lynette M Smith: Department of Biostatistics, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE.
  3. Fang Yu: Department of Biostatistics, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Rigor and reproducibility are two important cornerstones of medical and scientific advancement. Clinical and translational research (CTR) contains four phases (T1-T4), involving the translation of basic research to humans, then to clinical settings, practice, and the population, with the ultimate goal of improving public health. Here we provide a framework for rigorous and reproducible CTR.
METHODS: In this paper we define CTR, provide general and phase-specific recommendations for improving quality and reproducibility of CTR with emphases on study design, data collection and management, analyses and reporting. We present and discuss aspects of rigor and reproducibility following published examples of CTR from the literature, including one example that shows the development path of different treatments that address anaplastic lymphoma kinase-positive (ALK+) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).
RESULTS: It is particularly important to consider robust and unbiased experimental design and methodology for analysis and interpretation for clinical translation studies to ensure reproducibility before taking the next translational step. There are both commonality and differences along the clinical translation research phases in terms of research focuses and considerations regarding study design, implementation, and data analysis approaches.
CONCLUSIONS: Sound scientific practices, starting with rigorous study design, transparency, and team efforts can greatly enhance CTR. Investigators from multidisciplinary teams should work along the spectrum of CTR phases, and identify optimal practices for study design, data collection, data analysis, and results reporting to allow timely advances in the relevant field of research.

Keywords

References

  1. J Negat Results Biomed. 2002 Nov 12;1:2 [PMID: 12459050]
  2. Lancet. 2020 Feb 22;395(10224):565-574 [PMID: 32007145]
  3. J Clin Oncol. 2014 Apr 1;32(10):1012-9 [PMID: 24567430]
  4. Clin Transl Sci. 2011 Oct;4(5):332-7 [PMID: 22029804]
  5. J Clin Oncol. 2012 Sep 10;30(26):3297-303 [PMID: 22649133]
  6. Sci Transl Med. 2016 Jun 1;8(341):341ps12 [PMID: 27252173]
  7. Pers Soc Psychol Rev. 1998;2(3):196-217 [PMID: 15647155]
  8. Brain Behav. 2019 Jan;9(1):e01141 [PMID: 30506879]
  9. Ann Intern Med. 2003 Jan 7;138(1):W1-12 [PMID: 12513067]
  10. J Clin Transl Sci. 2017 Feb;1(1):60-66 [PMID: 28480056]
  11. Nature. 2017 Aug 24;548(7668):407-412 [PMID: 28813414]
  12. Perspect Clin Res. 2011 Jul;2(3):109-12 [PMID: 21897887]
  13. Nature. 2016 May 25;533(7604):452-4 [PMID: 27225100]
  14. J Transl Med. 2016 Aug 05;14(1):235 [PMID: 27492440]
  15. PLoS One. 2020 Jan 8;15(1):e0226237 [PMID: 31914165]
  16. Ann Intern Med. 2007 Oct 16;147(8):573-7 [PMID: 17938396]
  17. Lancet. 2020 Feb 29;395(10225):689-697 [PMID: 32014114]
  18. Epidemiology. 2011 Jan;22(1):128; author reply 128 [PMID: 21150360]
  19. Contemp Clin Trials. 2005 Apr;26(2):260-7 [PMID: 15837446]
  20. Lancet Oncol. 2016 Dec;17(12):1683-1696 [PMID: 27836716]
  21. BMJ. 2014 Nov 13;349:g6694 [PMID: 25395503]
  22. Ecancermedicalscience. 2016 Jun 07;10:ed56 [PMID: 27350794]
  23. J Clin Epidemiol. 2016 Jan;69:245-7 [PMID: 25981519]
  24. Nature. 2014 Jan 30;505(7485):612-3 [PMID: 24482835]
  25. N Engl J Med. 2017 Aug 31;377(9):829-838 [PMID: 28586279]
  26. N Engl J Med. 2018 Nov 22;379(21):2027-2039 [PMID: 30280657]
  27. Science. 2007 May 18;316(5827):1036-9 [PMID: 17431139]
  28. N Engl J Med. 2013 Jun 20;368(25):2385-94 [PMID: 23724913]
  29. Circulation. 2015 Jan 13;131(2):211-9 [PMID: 25561516]
  30. Nature. 2007 Aug 2;448(7153):561-6 [PMID: 17625570]
  31. Open Med. 2010;4(1):e60-8 [PMID: 21686296]
  32. Lancet Oncol. 2017 Jul;18(7):874-886 [PMID: 28602779]
  33. Nat Methods. 2014 Sep;11(9):879-80 [PMID: 25317452]
  34. Nature. 2012 Jan 10;481(7380):128 [PMID: 22237088]
  35. J Investig Med. 2012 Jun;60(5):768-75 [PMID: 22525233]
  36. Curr Med Res Opin. 2019 Apr;35(4):569-576 [PMID: 30286627]

Grants

  1. U54 GM115458/NIGMS NIH HHS

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0researchCTRreproducibilityclinicaldesigntranslationalstudydataphasestranslationanalysisRigorimportantscientificimprovingprovideframeworkrigorouscollectionreportingrigoralongpracticesteamINTRODUCTION:twocornerstonesmedicaladvancementClinicalcontainsfourT1-T4involvingbasichumanssettingspracticepopulationultimategoalpublichealthreproducibleMETHODS:paperdefinegeneralphase-specificrecommendationsqualityemphasesmanagementanalysespresentdiscussaspectsfollowingpublishedexamplesliteratureincludingoneexampleshowsdevelopmentpathdifferenttreatmentsaddressanaplasticlymphomakinase-positiveALK+non-smallcelllungcancerNSCLCRESULTS:particularlyconsiderrobustunbiasedexperimentalmethodologyinterpretationstudiesensuretakingnextstepcommonalitydifferencestermsfocusesconsiderationsregardingimplementationapproachesCONCLUSIONS:SoundstartingtransparencyeffortscangreatlyenhanceInvestigatorsmultidisciplinaryteamsworkspectrumidentifyoptimalresultsallowtimelyadvancesrelevantfielderareplicabilityscience

Similar Articles

Cited By