Implementation of a harmonized, report-friendly SDTM and ADaM Data Flow General by Marie-Rose Peltier Experience by Marie Fournier Groupe Utilisateurs.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Dimitri Kutsenko (Entimo AG)
Advertisements

Principal Statistical Programmer Accovion GmbH, Marburg, Germany
ADaM Implementation Guide: It’s Almost Here. Are You Ready?
Communicating with Standards Keeping it Simple Pamela Ryley Vertex Pharmaceuticals, Inc. September 29, 2006.
Converting Pharmacokinetic Data to the PP and PC Domains
The Importance of CDASH
Quick tour of CDISC’s ADaM standard
Kendle Implementation of Clinical Data Acquisition Standards Harmonization Dr Elke Sennewald Kendle 9th German CDISC User Group Meeting Berlin, 28 September.
Copyright © 2013, SAS Institute Inc. All rights reserved. LEVERAGE THE CDISC DATA MODEL TO STREAMLINE ANALYTICAL WORKFLOWS KELCI J. MICLAUS, PH.D. RESEARCH.
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
CONFIDENTIAL Integration of SDTM File Creation into Study Analysis: A Practical Approach Anna Kunina, Edzel Cabanero, Efim Dynin, Lindley Frahm 04Apr2008.
Metadata Management – Our Journey Thus Far
Gregory Steffens Novartis Associate Director, Programming NJ CDISC Users’ Group 17 April 2014 Supplemental Qualifiers.
CDISC and how Stata can help us implement it
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.
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.
How to process data from clinical trials and their open label extensions PhUSE, Berlin, October 2010 Thomas Grupe and Stephanie Bartsch, Clinical Data.
Remapping of Codes (and of course Decodes) in Analysis Data Sets for Electronic Submissions Joerg Guettner, Lead Statistical Analyst Bayer Pharma, Wuppertal,
Vertex and CDISC / MBC / 12March Vertex and CDISC Accomplishments and Strategy 12 March 2008 Lynn Anderson Associate Director Statistical Programming/Biometrics.
© 2008 Octagon Research Solutions, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 2 Octagon Research Solutions, Inc. Leading the Electronic Transformation of Clinical R&D ©
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
1CDISC 2002 RCRIM – Standard Domains Agenda NCI Presentation Standard Domains Working Group Goals Introduction to FDA Information Model (FIM) Discussion:
Overview and feed-back from CDISC European Interchange 2008 (From April 21 st to 25 th, COPENHAGEN) Groupe des Utilisateurs Francophones de CDISC Bagneux.
Update on SDTMIG v and SDTM v. 1.2 Bay Area User Group Meeting May 2008 Fred Wood Octagon Research Solutions.
Second Annual Japan CDISC Group (JCG) Meeting 28 January 2004 Julie Evans Director, Technical Services.
How to go from an SDTM Finding Domain to an ADaM-Compliant Basic Data Structure Analysis Dataset: An Example Qian Wang, MSD, Brussels, Belgium Carl Herremans,
Alun, living with Parkinson’s disease QS Domain: Challenges and Pitfalls Knut Müller UCB Biosciences Conference 2011 October 9th - 12th, Brighton UK.
CONFIDENTIAL The Ultimate Integration Challenge Jennifer Chin, Covance Hester Schoeman, Covance PhUSE Conference Berlin 2010 Paper DH06.
RCRIM Projects: Protocol Representation and CDISC Message(s) January 2007.
Implementation of CDISC Standards at Nycomed PhUSE, Basel (19-21 October 2009) Nycomed GmbH, Dr. B Traub CDISC Implementation at Nycomed.
Research based, people driven CDISC ADaM Datasets - from SDTM to submission CDISC Experience Exchange and ADaM Workshop 15 Dec 2008 Zoë Williams, LEO Pharma.
WG4: Standards Implementation Issues with CDISC Data Models Data Guide Subteam Summary of Review of Proposed Templates and Next Steps July 23, 2012.
1. © CDISC 2014 SDS ELT Rules Team Update Stetson Line 08 Dec
The Use of Metadata in Creating, Transforming and Transporting Clinical Data Gregory Steffens Director, Data Management and SAS Programming ICON Development.
White Papers to Fill the Gaps of Standardization of Tables, Figures, and Listings (Creating Standard Targets) Analyses and Displays for Vital Signs, ECG,
1 Much ADaM about Nothing – a PROC Away in a Day EndriPhUSE Conference Rowland HaleBrighton (UK), 9th - 12th October 2011.
ICON CD04 - Ensuring Compliant and Consistent Data Mappings for SDTM-based Studies – an ICON Approach Jennie Mc Guirk 11 th October 2011.
April ADaM define.xml - Metadata Design Analysis Results Metadata List of key analyses (as defined in change order) Analysis Results Metadata per.
UC3: Complications Related to Unscheduled performed instead scheduled (TK) Raw visit numberVISITNUMLBDYLBDTC 2missing VISITVISITNUMSVDYSVDTCSVUPDES.
How good is your SEND data? Timothy Kropp FDA/CDER/OCS 1.
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.
Metadata Driven Clinical Data Integration – Integral to Clinical Analytics April 11, 2016 Kalyan Gopalakrishnan, Priya Shetty Intelent Inc. Sudeep Pattnaik,
CDISC SDS Oncology Domains: An Orientation to Aid Review & Feedback Barrie Nelson CDISC SDS Oncology Sub Team Lead
Generation of real-time SDTM datasets and metadata through a generic SDTM converter mechanism CDISC (CDASH/SDTM) integration into OC/RDC Peter Van Reusel.
ADaM or SDTM? A Comparison of Pooling Strategies for Integrated Analyses in the Age of CDISC Joerg Guettner, Lead Statistical Analyst, Bayer Pharma, Wuppertal,
Submission Standards: The Big Picture Gary G. Walker Associate Director, Programming Standards, Global Data Solutions, Global Data Management.
Software Development Module Code: CST 240 Chapter 6: Software Maintenance Al Khawarizmi International College, AL AIN, U.A.E Lecturer: Karamath Ateeq.
CDISC submission standard
Clinical database management: From raw data through study tabulations to analysis datasets Thank you for your kind introduction, and the opportunity to.
Building Block macro principle for Standard Program Library Design
Greg Steffens Noumena Solutions
Secondary Uses Primary Use EHR and other Auhortities Clinical Trial
by M.Fournier Groupe Utilisateurs Francophones du CDISC – 08/02/05
MAKE SDTM EASIER START WITH CDASH !
Creating ADaM Friendly Analysis Data from SDTM Using Meta-data by Erik Brun & Rico Schiller (CD ) H. Lundbeck A/S 13-Oct
Traceability between SDTM and ADaM converted analysis datasets
Patterns emerging from chaos
To change this title, go to Notes Master
Fabienne NOEL CDISC – 2013, December 18th
Visualizing Subject Level Data in Clinical Trial Data
German Speaking CDISC User Network
An FDA Statistician’s Perspective on Standardized Data Sets
Safety Analytics Workshop – Computational Science Symposium 2019
An exploration of quality gaps in SDTM implementation activities and ideas on how to address these gaps through appropriate resourcing Dianne Weatherall:
German Speaking CDISC User Network
Presentation transcript:

Implementation of a harmonized, report-friendly SDTM and ADaM Data Flow General by Marie-Rose Peltier Experience by Marie Fournier Groupe Utilisateurs Francophones du CDISC – 08/02/05

2 Framework of SDTM SDS  SDTM SDS variables are mostly CRF variables. For report-writing and graphs, derived variables are lacking.  SDTM SDS variables are mostly character variables. Numeric values are needed for sorting and analysis.  Date variables are ISO dates. It is necessary to have numeric dates for the calculation of relative days, duration, etc.  Population flags, drug variables and other common variables are not readily available for use in analysis.  Some data structures are designed to facilitate standardization, and are not one PROC away.

3 Framework of ADaM  CRF variables are further processed. It is hard to trace back to the source variables and to validate.  Variable attributes can be inconsistent across domains.  The lack of standardization makes it difficult to develop macros or programs for variables that are common to or similar in root construction for both SDTM and ADaM.

4 Where implementing SDTM ADaM ?  Logically SDTM created in CDM and ADaM in Biostatistics Concerns  SDTM contains derived variables (Baseline Flags, Reference dates, Treatment Emergence Flag, Population Flags,..)  SDTM proposed structure not efficient (ECG, Vital Signs)  Some SDTM domain contains data from different domains (ex disposition)  SDTM defines not all CRF variables (problem Suppqual)  Problem for specific TA domains  Decided to create final SDTM and ADS in Biostatistics

5 Summary of issues  Derived variables should be created in ADaM first, and “back- populated” to SDTM SDS!  Logically, derived variables should be created directly in SDTM SDS first!  Same Variables in SDTM and ADaM REDUNDANCY !!  SDTM only for submission : not sure whether study will be submitted.  Priority Anaysis

6 Solution  To resolve redundancy and process flow issues, integrate the same and yet separate SDTM and ADaM domains into single domains.  Enhance the integrated domains for SDTM domains to complement the incompleteness of ADaM domains and vice versa: SDTM SDS variables become more analysis-friendly and report-friendly ADaM ADS variables become easier to validate and more structured

7 The use of the integrated domains  Each integrated SDTM and ADaM domain is usable for: producing tables, listings and graphs, creating SDTM SDS domains and adding SUPPQUAL and RELREC at submission, creating additional domains which are dependent on the variables from the integrated domains. The additional domains are also used for producing tables, listings and graphs.

8 An Optimal SDTM/ADaM Data Flow Note: The color pink stands for ADS and are used for reporting. Both the ADS and the SDTM SDS/SUPPQUAL data are submitted. The dotted line means when needed. Map and derive variables + Create variables for reports CDM database SAS Operational Database Non-standard domains Further processing of variables Additional ADS Integrated SDTM/ADaM SUPPQUAL SDTM SDS For non-standard domains, structural change if necessary standardnon-standard

9 Data Flow Integrated SDS/ADS Domains  Mostly Safety data  Ready for reporting  Following the definition of the SDTM (Study Data Tabulation Model) principles, which is intended to provide a generalized model for submitting all types of data fit in one of the three SDS classes: interventions, events and findings (fixed structure) Naming conventions ISO8601 format (character)  Contains All CRF variables (SDTM naming conventions and attributes) Common Variables SDS standard derived variables ADS standard derived variables Code and decode (ex. SEX=F SEXN=1)  Add flag ‘Target Dataset’ : Variable ADS or SDS or Suppqual

10 An Optimal SDTM/ADaM Data Flow Note: The color pink stands for ADS and are used for reporting. Both the ADS and the SDTM SDS/SUPPQUAL data are submitted. The dotted line means when needed. Map and derive variables + Create variables for reports CDM database SAS Operational Database Non-standard domains Further processing of variables Additional ADS ADS/SDS SUPPQUAL SDTM SDS For non-standard domains, structural change if necessary standardnon-standard

11 Data Flow : Non Standard Domains  Datasets that don’t fit in one of the CDISC SDTM structures (Interventions, Events, Findings)  Ready for reporting  The structure for analysis (reporting) is equal to the structure of the raw data (horizontal)  Contains All CRF variables Common Variables All analysis variables ISO8601 format (character) Code and decode (ex. SEX=F SEXN=1)

12 An Optimal SDTM/ADaM Data Flow Note: The color pink stands for ADS and are used for reporting. Both the ADS and the SDTM SDS/SUPPQUAL data are submitted. The dotted line means when needed. Map and derive variables + Create variables for reports CDM database SAS Operational Database Non-standard domains Further processing of variables Additional ADS ADS/SDS SUPPQUAL SDTM SDS For non-standard domains, structural change if necessary standardnon-standard

13 Data Flow : Additional Analysis Datasets  Data which directly support the assessment of primary and secondary study objectives “Direct”: one statistical procedure away from statistical results Usually highly derived (i.e., many computational steps) from CRT data  Structure depends on Analysis (Ready for reporting)  Contains CRF variables needed for analysis All analysis variables

14 Advantages  Analysis-ready, report-ready, SDTM-ready and ADaM-ready It is more efficient to have one set of data specifications that combines the requirements of SDTM, ADaM and report-writing than to have two separate sets of data specifications (one for SDTM SDS and one for ADaM) that have redundant variables.  It is easier to create, maintain and update one set of data domains.  There is no need to program, validate and crosscheck two sets of domains on the same topic. (one set of programs/macros)  There is no need to break variables in domains apart into SUPPQUAL with RELREC for SDTM and to put them back again for report writing.  Possibility to give priority to analysis if remapping to SDTM to complicated

15 Disadvantage  Need for extra step before submission Remap non standard domains to SDTM Need to break variables to define relations (RELREC), and break variables into domain SUPPQUAL