4.4 Article

Using Digital Tools to Advance Alzheimer's Drug Trials During a Pandemic: The EU/US CTAD Task Force

Journal

Publisher

SPRINGER BASEL AG
DOI: 10.14283/jpad.2021.36

Keywords

Alzheimer's disease; clinical outcomes; digital tools; remote assessments

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The 2020 COVID-19 pandemic disrupted AD clinical studies globally, prompting exploration of digital technologies to enable remote assessments. While digital tools have potential to accelerate trials and reduce costs, concerns remain about data stability, validity, generalizability, and regulatory acceptance. The Task Force supports further exploration of digital technologies, emphasizing the need for standardization of digital readouts.
The 2020 COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted Alzheimer's disease (AD) clinical studies worldwide. Digital technologies may help minimize disruptions by enabling remote assessment of subtle cognitive and functional changes over the course of the disease. The EU/US Clinical Trials in Alzheimer's Disease (CTAD) Task Force met virtually in November 2020 to explore the opportunities and challenges associated with the use of digital technologies in AD clinical research. While recognizing the potential of digital tools to accelerate clinical trials, improve the engagement of diverse populations, capture clinically meaningful data, and lower costs, questions remain regarding the stability, validity, generalizability, and reproducibility of digital data. Substantial concerns also exist regarding regulatory acceptance and privacy. Nonetheless, the Task Force supported further exploration of digital technologies through collaboration and data sharing, noting the need for standardization of digital readouts. They also concluded that while it may be premature to employ remote assessments for trials of novel experimental medications, remote studies of non-invasive, multi-domain approaches may be feasible at this time.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available