Establishing Clinical Utility of a New Diagnostic Test for Rheumatology Patients
NCT ID: NCT04266860
Last Updated: 2020-09-16
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
NA
166 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2012-03-01
2013-03-01
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Lupus Interval Monitoring to Manage Disease Flare and Enable Treatment Optimization
NCT03142412
A Study in Participants With Mild-to-moderate Systemic Lupus Erythematosus
NCT05866861
Screening Protocol for Subjects Being Evaluated for Center for Human Immunology, Autoimmunity, and Inflammatory Diseases (CHI) Protocols
NCT00968084
A Phase 1/2a Study of DB-2304 in Healthy Adults and SLE Participants
NCT06625671
This Project Aims to Understand the Needs of Rheumatologists and Other Specialties in the Care of Patients With SLE
NCT06698900
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
This study leverages simulated patient cases, called Clinical Performance and Value vignettes (CPVs), in a proven methodology to rapidly measure physician care decisions. CPVs are a unique and scalable tool that standardizes practice measurement by having all providers care for the same (virtual) patients. With all providers caring for the same patients, the CPVs generate unbiased data that yields powerful insights into clinical decision making and how these decisions change with the introduction of a new product or solution. CPVs have been validated and used effectively in rheumatology. Data from the CPVs can quickly demonstrate the clinical utility of a solution, be published in peer-reviewed literature, inform marketing strategies and positively impact coverage and reimbursement decisions.
The study is a prospective cohort trial with six steps:
1. Enrollment: The study will enroll an estimated 166 practicing rheumatologists who practice in the U.S. and are determined to be eligible by an eligibility screener.
2. Provider survey: Once providers are enrolled in the study, they will be asked to complete a questionnaire describing their practice and professional background.
3. Randomization: The 166 rheumatologists will be randomized into equally-sized control and intervention arms.
4. CPVs (First Round): Physicians will complete three randomly-assigned CPV patient simulations. Cases will be identical across the intervention and control arms. All interactive cases are presented on an online platform, and are accessible via unique weblinks and any internet-connected computer.
5. Intervention education: Intervention-arm rheumatologists will receive educational materials describing the clinical validation and use cases of the IFN-1 test. This material will replicate what physicians would receive as part of an actual marketing push introducing them to the IFN-1 test. These materials may be comprised of a slide deck, fact sheet, webinar, and/or case studies.
6. CPVs (Second Round): Physicians will then complete three additional CPV patient simulations in random order. Cases will be identical across the intervention and control arms, except that the intervention arm will receive IFN-1 test results at an appropriate point in each simulated case in the post-intervention round. Control arm physicians will continue to have access to standard of care diagnostic tools only.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
SINGLE_GROUP
All eligible and consented participants will complete two rounds of three patient simulations.
The intervention arm only will receive educational material about the DxTerity test in between these two rounds, and be provided simulated DxTerity test results in the second round of simulated cases.
DIAGNOSTIC
NONE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Experimental
Experimental-arm providers will complete two rounds of three simulated patient cases (CPVs) with two additions described in the next column:
Experimental - Test Results and Education
First, these providers will receive educational materials (e.g. a slide deck, mock test result and one-page fact sheet) meant to mimic what physicians will receive in the real-world market as they learn about the DxTerity test.
Second, within each of their second-round cases, intervention-arm physicians only will receive simulated test results from the DxTerity test at the clinically-appropriate point in each case.
Control
These providers will complete two rounds of three simulated patient cases (CPVs) only.
No interventions assigned to this group
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Experimental - Test Results and Education
First, these providers will receive educational materials (e.g. a slide deck, mock test result and one-page fact sheet) meant to mimic what physicians will receive in the real-world market as they learn about the DxTerity test.
Second, within each of their second-round cases, intervention-arm physicians only will receive simulated test results from the DxTerity test at the clinically-appropriate point in each case.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
2. Averaging at least 20 hours per week of clinical and patient care duties over the last six months
3. Practicing in the U.S.
4. English speaking
5. Access to the internet
6. Informed, signed and voluntarily consented to be in the study
Exclusion Criteria
2. Practicing in an academic setting
3. Unable to access the internet
4. Not practicing in the U.S.
5. Not averaging at least 20 hours per week of clinical or patient care duties over the last six months
6. Do not voluntarily consent to be in the study
ALL
Yes
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
DxTerity Diagnostics
INDUSTRY
Qure Healthcare, LLC
INDUSTRY
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
John Peabody, MD, PhD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
President, QURE Healthcare
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
QURE Healthcare
San Francisco, California, United States
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Burgon TB, Cox-Chapman J, Czarnecki C, Kropp R, Guerriere R, Paculdo D, Peabody JW. Engaging Primary Care Providers to Reduce Unwanted Clinical Variation and Support ACO Cost and Quality Goals: A Unique Provider-Payer Collaboration. Popul Health Manag. 2019 Aug;22(4):321-329. doi: 10.1089/pop.2018.0111. Epub 2018 Oct 17.
Peabody J, Martin M, DeMaria L, Florentino J, Paculdo D, Paul M, Vanzo R, Wassman ER, Burgon T. Clinical Utility of a Comprehensive, Whole Genome CMA Testing Platform in Pediatrics: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial of Simulated Patients in Physician Practices. PLoS One. 2016 Dec 30;11(12):e0169064. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0169064. eCollection 2016.
Peabody JW, Strand V, Shimkhada R, Lee R, Chernoff D. Impact of rheumatoid arthritis disease activity test on clinical practice. PLoS One. 2013 May 7;8(5):e63215. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0063215. Print 2013.
Solon O, Woo K, Quimbo SA, Shimkhada R, Florentino J, Peabody JW. A novel method for measuring health care system performance: experience from QIDS in the Philippines. Health Policy Plan. 2009 May;24(3):167-74. doi: 10.1093/heapol/czp003. Epub 2009 Feb 18.
DeMaria L, Acelajado MC, Luck J, Ta H, Chernoff D, Florentino J, Peabody JW. Variations and practice in the care of patients with rheumatoid arthritis: quality and cost of care. J Clin Rheumatol. 2014 Mar;20(2):79-86. doi: 10.1097/RHU.0000000000000076.
Peabody JW, Luck J, Glassman P, Jain S, Hansen J, Spell M, Lee M. Measuring the quality of physician practice by using clinical vignettes: a prospective validation study. Ann Intern Med. 2004 Nov 16;141(10):771-80. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-141-10-200411160-00008.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
01DXT2019
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.