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.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
FDA CDER Common Data Standards Issues
Advertisements

Principal Statistical Programmer Accovion GmbH, Marburg, Germany
ADaM Implementation Guide: It’s Almost Here. Are You Ready?
Experience and process for collaborating with an outsource company to create the define file. Ganesh Sankaran TAKE Solutions.
UC5:Assigning of Epoch after treatment discontinuation (NS)
The Importance of CDASH
Quick tour of CDISC’s ADaM standard
SEND Standard for the Exchange of Nonclinical Data
Enhancing Data Quality of Distributive Trade Statistics Workshop for African countries on the Implementation of International Recommendations for Distributive.
Standardisation of Trial Design Definitions in CDW at Novo Nordisk
ADaM Standards Wouter van Wyk. Why ADaM –SDTM purpose is to provide collected data Not designed for ease of analysis –ADaM purpose is to provide data.
CDISC (CDASH/SDTM) integration into OC/RDC
John Naim, PhD Director Clinical Trials Research Unit
Finalized FDA Requirements for Standardized Data
Study Data Standardization Plan Kick0ff Meeting 23 July 2014.
Life Sciences Accelerated R&D Services The Science of Getting Products to Patients Faster Study Data Standardization Plan Use Case Experience Dave Izard.
Gregory Steffens Novartis Associate Director, Programming NJ CDISC Users’ Group 17 April 2014 Supplemental Qualifiers.
Requirements for Standardized Study Data: Update on Guidance Ron Fitzmartin, PhD, MBA Data Standards Program Office of Strategic Programs Center for Drug.
Monika Kawohl Statistical Programming Accovion GmbH Tutorial: define.xml.
SDTM Validation Rules Sub-team CDISC INTRAchange Feb 26 th, 2014.
23 August 2015Michael Knoessl1 PhUSE 2008 Manchester / Michael Knoessl Implementing CDISC at Boehringer Ingelheim.
Dominic, age 8, living with epilepsy SDTM Implementation Guide : Clear as Mud Strategies for Developing Consistent Company Standards PhUSE 2011 – CD02.
JumpStart the Regulatory Review: Applying the Right Tools at the Right Time to the Right Audience Lilliam Rosario, Ph.D. Director Office of Computational.
CBER CDISC Test Submission Dieter Boß CSL Behring, Marburg 20-Mar-2012.
© 2011 Octagon Research Solutions, Inc. All Rights Reserved. The contents of this document are confidential and proprietary to Octagon Research Solutions,
PhUSE SDE, 28-May A SAS based Solution for define.xml Monika Kawohl Statistical Programming Accovion.
Implementation of a harmonized, report-friendly SDTM and ADaM Data Flow General by Marie-Rose Peltier Experience by Marie Fournier Groupe Utilisateurs.
Antje Rossmanith, Roche 14th German CDISC User Group, 25-Sep-2012
1CDISC 2002 RCRIM – Standard Domains Agenda NCI Presentation Standard Domains Working Group Goals Introduction to FDA Information Model (FIM) Discussion:
Confidential - Property of Navitas Accelerate define.xml using defineReady - Saravanan June 17, 2015.
Update on SDTMIG v and SDTM v. 1.2 Bay Area User Group Meeting May 2008 Fred Wood Octagon Research Solutions.
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.
© Copyright 2008 ADaM Validation and Integrity Checks Wednesday 12 th October 2011 Louise Cross ICON Clinical Research, Marlow, UK.
SDTM Validation Delaware Valley CDISC user network Ketan Durve Johnson and Johnson Pharmaceutical Reasearch and Development May 11 th 2009.
RCRIM Projects: Protocol Representation and CDISC Message(s) January 2007.
Research based, people driven CDISC ADaM Datasets - from SDTM to submission CDISC Experience Exchange and ADaM Workshop 15 Dec 2008 Zoë Williams, LEO Pharma.
DIVISION OF REPRODUCTIVE AND UROLOGIC PRODUCTS Physician Labeling Rule Lisa Soule, M.D.
HIT Policy Committee METHODOLOGIC ISSUES Tiger Team Summary Helen Burstin National Quality Forum Jon White Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality October.
Research Study Data Standards Standards for research study data for submission to regulatory authorities Standard development divided into three parts:
Template provided by: “posters4research.com” Challenges and Solutions for Mapping Pathology Data to SEND Mike Wasko, Rich Buchanan, Fred Mura, and Laura.
April ADaM define.xml - Metadata Design Analysis Results Metadata List of key analyses (as defined in change order) Analysis Results Metadata per.
1. © CDISC 2014 Stetson Line, Team Lead CDISC Intrachange SDTM Rules Sub-team Update.
How good is your SEND data? Timothy Kropp FDA/CDER/OCS 1.
Generation of real-time SDTM datasets and metadata through a generic SDTM converter mechanism CDISC (CDASH/SDTM) integration into OC/RDC Peter Van Reusel.
Validation Gary Gensinger Deputy Director Office of Business Process Support Center for Drug Evaluation and Research.
Most Common Issues in Define.xml files
Practical Considerations for Data Validation
Event-Level Narrative
A need for prescriptive define.xml
Traceability Look for the source of your analysis results
Experience and process for collaborating with an outsource company to create the define file. Ganesh Sankaran TAKE Solutions.
Accelerate define.xml using defineReady - Saravanan June 17, 2015.
Secondary Uses Primary Use EHR and other Auhortities Clinical Trial
Critical Reading of Clinical Study Results
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
What can we do? Answers from CSS Nonclinical Topics WG
Snapshot of the Clinical Trials Enterprise as revealed by ClinicalTrials.gov Content downloaded: September 2012.
Practical Considerations for Data Validation
To change this title, go to Notes Master
Visualizing Subject Level Data in Clinical Trial Data
SDTM and ADaM Implementation FAQ
Nonclinical Working Group Update CSS 2014
An FDA Statistician’s Perspective on Standardized Data Sets
Safety Analytics Workshop – Computational Science Symposium 2019
Data Submissions Douglas Warfield, Ph.D. Technical Lead, eData Team
The role of metadata in census data dissemination
A handbook on validation methodology. Metrics.
Presentation transcript:

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 Drug Evaluation and Research US Food and Drug Administration

JumpStart Service Assess and report on whether data is fit for purpose Quality Tool loading ability Analysis ability Assess and report on whether data is fit for purpose Quality Tool loading ability Analysis ability PurposeBenefits for the Reviewer Understand their data, analyses that can be performed, and identify potential information requests for the sponsor Improves the efficiency of their review by setting up tools and performing common analyses, which provides them with time to focus on more complex analyses Points them to a possible direction for deeper analysis Load data into tools for reviewer use and run automated analyses that are universal or common (e.g., demographics, simple AE) Load data into tools for reviewer use and run automated analyses that are universal or common (e.g., demographics, simple AE) Provide analyses to highlight areas that may need a focus for review

JumpStart uses SDTM data JumpStart uses the following SDTM domains: –Data Fitness session analyzes all submitted datasets –Safety Analysis session focuses on DM, DS, EX, AE, LB, and VS JumpStart uses SDTM data in the following ways: –To run automated analyses –Create any derived variables that are needed –Check data against values in the submitted clinical study reports 3

Data from Applications in JumpStart Data from a total of 34 applications: –Consisting of 58 individual studies –Across 14 review divisions in OND –Both NDAs and BLAs 4 DEC 2015 FEB 2015 SEPT Applications (PhUSE CSS 2015) 24 Applications

Data Quality Issues Define File Study Data Reviewer’s Guide Disposition (DS) Domain Items in Technical Conformance Guide (TCG) Other Issues 5 Define File SDRG DS Domain Items in TCG

Define File Use Define.xml v2.0 –Lacking a complete Define file greatly increases the amount of time reviewers spend understanding an application Include detailed description of data elements: –Detailed, reproducible computational algorithms for derived variables –Code lists that describe categories, subcategories, reference time-pts –Applicable value level metadata & description of SUPPQUAL domains –Explanations of sponsor-defined identifiers (e.g., –SPID, -GRPID) Provide separate unit code lists for each domain Define File SDRG DS Domain TCG 6

Study Data Reviewer’s Guide (SDRG) Provide SDRG for each data package with each section populated (TCG 2.2) Missing (or incomplete) in 35% of applications Lacking a complete SDRG greatly increases the amount of time reviewers spend understanding an application Fix all possible issues identified by FDA Validation Rules Include clear and detailed explanation for all “non- fixable” issues (TCG 2.2) Provide Data Flow diagram that shows traceability between data capture, storage, and creation of datasets 7 Define File SDRG DS Domain Generic Data 7

Disposition (DS) Domain Include time-point information about the event in Disposition records, not just when the event was recorded (include start dates for Disposition events) Include records regarding subject study completion and last follow-up contact with subject in DS domain Accurately code reasons why subject did not complete the study or study treatment Define File SDRG DS Domain Generic Data 8

Additional Items in TCG Provide Trial Design domains that are complete and accurate (TCG ) –Trial Summary domain missing in 15% of applications –Down to 8% (2015, n=24) from 30% (2014, n=10) Include EPOCH variable in all appropriate domains (AE, LB, CM, EX, VS, DS) (TCG ) –Missing in 79% of applications Use Baseline Flags in LB and VS (TCG ) –Missing baseline tests or flags in 29% of applications 9 Define File SDRG DS Domain Items in TCG 9

Use CDISC controlled terminology variables when available (TCG Section 6) –Controlled terminology issues in 62% of applications Include Seriousness Criteria for all serious adverse events (TCG ) –Missing (or with inconsistencies) in 50% of applications –Important to independently verify that AE was serious Include study day variable for all observational datasets (TCG ) Define File SDRG DS Domain Items in TCG Items in TCG (continued) 10

Other Issues Remove duplicate records 59% with duplicate issues Duplicate records in the LB, VS, and EG domain with potentially contradictory information make it difficult to summarize results Provide AE Treatment Emergent Flag in SUPPAE domain 68% missing AETRTEMFL Convert to standard units consistently for laboratory data 21% missing (or inconsistent) Standard Units for labs when original units were given Provide all AEDECODs 13% missing at least one AEDECOD 11

Ensure consistent subject death information across all datasets (DM, AE, DS, and CO) DM death flags consistent between DS and AE records and consistent with death information located in CO domain Important so that pertinent death information not missed if relying only on certain flags or indicators 12 Other Issues

Properly use Actual Arm (ACTARM) Populate Reference End Date (RFPENDTC) according to SDTM guidance Provide additional MedDRA information that facilitates harmonization of versions across studies 13 Other Issues

Thank You 14