Abstract:BACKGROUND:On-site monitoring is a crucial component of quality control in clinical trials. However, many cast doubt on its cost-effectiveness due to various issues, such as a lack of monitoring focus that could assist in prioritizing limited resources during a site visit. Consequently, an increasing number of trial sponsors are implementing a hybrid monitoring strategy that combines on-site monitoring with centralised monitoring. One of the primary objectives of centralised monitoring, as stated in the clinical trial guidelines, is to guide and adjust the extent and frequency of on-site monitoring. Quality tolerance limits (QTLs) introduced in ICH E6(R2) and thresholds proposed by TransCelerate Biopharma are two existing approaches for achieving this objective at the trial- and site-levels, respectively. The funnel plot, as another threshold-based site-level method, overcomes the limitation of TransCelerate's method by adjusting thresholds flexibly based on site sizes. Nonetheless, both methods do not transparently explain the reason for choosing the thresholds that they used or whether their choices are optimal in any certain sense. Additionally, related Bayesian monitoring methods are also lacking. METHODS:We propose a simple, transparent, and user-friendly Bayesian-based risk boundary for determining the extent and frequency of on-site monitoring both at the trial- and site-levels. We developed a four-step approach, including: 1) establishing risk levels for key risk indicators (KRIs) along with their corresponding monitoring actions and estimates; 2) calculating the optimal risk boundaries; 3) comparing the outcomes of KRIs against the optimal risk boundaries; and 4) providing recommendations based on the comparison results. Our method can be used to identify the optimal risk boundaries within an established risk level range and is applicable to continuous, discrete, and time-to-event endpoints. RESULTS:We evaluate the performance of the proposed risk boundaries via simulations that mimic various realistic clinical trial scenarios. The performance of the proposed risk boundaries is compared against the funnel plot using real clinical trial data. The results demonstrate the applicability and flexibility of the proposed method for clinical trial monitoring. Moreover, we identify key factors that affect the optimality and performance of the proposed risk boundaries, respectively. CONCLUSION:Given the aforementioned advantages of the proposed risk boundaries, we expect that they will benefit the clinical trial community at large, in particular in the realm of risk-based monitoring.

Comparison of anchor-based methods for estimating thresholds of meaningful within-patient change using simulated PROMIS PF 20a data under various joint distribution characteristic conditions

Evaluating anchor variables and variation in meaningful score differences for PROMIS® Pediatric measures in children and adolescents living with a rheumatic disease

Exploration of the methods of establishing the minimum clinical important difference based on anchors and their applications in the quality of life measurement scale QLICP-BR (V2.0) for breast cancer

Establishing Clinically Meaningful Change on Outcome Assessments Frequently Used in Trials of Mild Cognitive Impairment Due to Alzheimer’s Disease

PROMIS and FAAM Minimal Clinically Important Differences in Foot and Ankle Orthopedics

Significant individual change should be used as a lower bound for anchor based estimates of meaningful change on patient-reported outcome scores

How scoring limits the usability of minimal important differences (MIDs) as responder definition (RD): an exemplary demonstration using EORTC QLQ-C30 subscales

The Minimal Clinically Important Difference Changes Greatly Based on the Different Calculation Methods

Editorial Commentary: Utility of Patient-Reported Outcome Threshold Scores to Estimate Patient Satisfaction: 'Let's Ask the Patient!'

A systematic survey identified methodological issues in studies estimating anchor-based minimal important differences in patient-reported outcomes

Minimal Clinically Important Difference and Substantial Clinical Benefit Using PROMIS CAT in Cervical Spine Surgery

Effect of present state bias on minimal important change estimates: a simulation study

The PROMIS of better outcome assessment: responsiveness, floor and ceiling effects, and Internet administration

Assessing Clinically Important Differences During Rehabilitation for Stroke: A Pilot Study Evaluating Anchor and Distribution Derived Estimates of Physical Function Change in Classically Summed and Rasch Models of Section GG of the Inpatient Rehabilitation Facility Patient Assessment Instrument

Identification of meaningful individual-level change thresholds for worsening on the patient-reported outcomes version of the common terminology criteria for adverse events (PRO-CTCAE®)

Predictors of response in PROMIS-global in a chronic low back pain specialty clinic: STarTBack and chronic overlapping pain conditions

Comparison of statistical methods for the analysis of patient-reported outcomes in randomised controlled trials: A simulation study

Clinical importance in Alzheimer's disease: effects of anchor agreement and disease severity

Conceptualizing meaningful between-group difference in change over time: a demonstration of possible viewpoints

Determining the Extent and Frequency of On-Site Monitoring: a Bayesian Risk-Based Approach

Comparing the Performance of Statistical Adjustment Methods By Recovering the Experimental Benchmark from the REFLUX Trial