Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Recruiting

NCT Number: NCT06588452

Manual Versus AI-Assisted Clinical Trial Screening Using Large-Language Models

A prospective randomized controlled trial comparing manual review and AI screening for patient eligibility determination and enrollments. A structured query will identify potentially eligible patients from the Mass General Brigham Electronic Data Warehouse (EDW), who will then be randomized into either the manual review arm or the AI-assisted review arm.

Recruiting

Interested in participating?

Request Info

Key information

Age range

18 year–90 year

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Observational

Primary location

Brigham and Women's Hospital

Boston, Massachusetts, 02115, United States

Location status: Recruiting

Location contact

Alexander J Blood, MD, MSc

CONTACT

[email protected]

617-732-7144

About this study

Screening participants for clinical trials is a critical yet challenging process that requires significant time and resources. Traditionally, patient screening has been manual, relying on the diligence and judgment of study staff. However, manual screening is prone to human error and inefficiencies, contributing to high costs and prolonged trial durations.

Recent advancements in natural language processing (NLP) and large language models (LLMs), such as GPT-4, offer potential solutions to improve the accuracy, efficiency, and reliability of the screening process. Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG)-enabled systems, like RECTIFIER, have shown promise in enhancing clinical trial screening by automating the extraction and analysis of relevant data from electronic health records (EHRs).

In the investigators' previous study, RECTIFIER demonstrated high accuracy in screening patients for clinical trials, aligning closely with expert clinician reviews and outperforming manual study staff in several criteria. It underscored the potential for LLMs to transform clinical trial screening, making it more efficient and cost-effective while maintaining high standards of accuracy and reliability. However, before RECTIFIER is scaled to be used across many domains of clinical trials, it should be validated prospectively in the real-world setting to enroll patients.

In the Co-Operative Program for Implementation of Optimal Therapy in Heart Failure (COPILOT-HF) trial (NCT05734690), the investigators will identify potential participants through EHR queries followed by manual review, which provides an opportunity for RECTIFIER to improve the screening process. By leveraging RECTIFIER, this study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of automated AI screening compared to traditional manual methods for enrollments of patients into an ongoing clinical trial.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: Yes

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

  • Documented diagnosis of heart failure (e.g., ICD-9 codes 428 ICD-10 codes I50 or Problem list in the electronic health record)
  • Most recent left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) assessed within the past 24 months
  • Seen Mass General Brigham provider within the last 24 months

Exclusion criteria

  • LVEF <50% currently prescribed or intolerant to an evidence-based beta-blocker, ARNI, MRA, and SGLT2i at least 50% goal dose
  • LVEF>50% currently prescribed or intolerant to SGLT2i
  • Systolic blood pressure (SBP) <90 mmHg at last measure

Treatment and study plan

RECTIFIER - a generative artificial intelligence screening tool

Other

RECTIFIER is a large-language model based, generative artificial intelligence-enabled inclusion and exclusion criteria assessment tool.

Manual clinical trial screening by study staff

Other

The current gold standard - study staff manually review potentially eligible patients through chart review.

Primary outcomes

  1. Determine study eligibility, analyzed using a survival analysis framework, specifically the Fine-Gray subdistribution hazards model, to account for competing risks.

    Time frame: Through study completion, an average of 6 months

    Assess the likelihood of eligibility determination, comparing the AI-assisted screening group to the manual screening group accounting for the competing risk of ineligibility determination.

Secondary outcomes

  1. Likelihood of achieving successful enrollment or eligibility, assessed using the hierarchical win ratio.

    Time frame: Through study completion, an average of 6 months

    Compare the likelihood of achieving these outcomes between the AI-assisted and manual screening groups, using the unmatched hierarchical win ratio method comparing each patient in the AI assisted screening group to each patient in the manual screening group.

Study contacts

Contact information is provided by the study sponsor or research team.

Alexander J Blood, MD

CONTACT

[email protected]

617-732-7144

Ozan Unlu, MD

CONTACT

[email protected]

617-732-7144

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Brigham and Women's Hospital

Other

Registry information

Acronym: MAPS-LLM

Important dates

Study start
2024
Primary completion
2024
Study completion
2024
First posted
Sep 19, 2024
Registry last updated
Sep 19, 2024

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.