Upstream integration of implementation planning in clinical trials through the blood and marrow transplant clinical trials network

Abstract Background: Dissemination and implementation science (D+I) efforts often begin after clinical trial (CT) efficacy data are available. However, delaying this work limits opportunities to identify barriers and facilitators that can enhance adoption of evidence-based practices. Integrating D+I during trial development, activation, and conduct supports more timely, effective, and scalable implementation. The Blood and Marrow Transplant Clinical Trials Network (BMT CTN) includes >125 centers, conducting transplant and cellular therapy (TCT) trials with practice-changing potential, with >17,000 patients enrolled since 2001. Data from Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR) provides a way to measure real-world adoption. With this comprehensive structure in place, the BMT CTN launched a D+I Committee that established a D+I process to better understand uptake of CT findings and to leverage that information to promote adoption. Methods: Informed by established D+I frameworks, a structured, cyclical process to integrate implementation considerations spanning the CT lifecycle was developed. A multidisciplinary team including experts in D+I, clinicians, and investigators iteratively refined the proposed D+I algorithm. The process begins upstream when a trial concept is approved to move forward, it is shared with the D+I Committee for initial assessment. This includes a landscape review for studies in development using CIBMTR data, literature, and expert experience. The Committee then reviews the developing protocol with the BMT CTN protocol team to proactively identify implementation barriers and facilitators to implementation in real-world settings and outline plans for dissemination. The Committee also provides recommendations for integrating relevant implementation data collection and analyses within the protocol. After study completion, both clinical efficacy and implementation outcomes are analyzed, followed by active dissemination. Additional assessment using surveys, qualitative methods, and CIBMTR data occurs after dissemination to understand adoption. Insights gathered also inform further refinement of the process. Tools and templates are in development to build capacity and ensure consistency for Committee members. Results: To date, the Committee has published three peer-reviewed articles addressing implementation implications of three BMT CTN trials (PMC7735536, PMC8578257, PMC9364468) and a fourth is in press. Using the designed D+I process flow, a current effort used a survey sent to US CIBMTR centers, to evaluate factors influencing the implementation of results of the BMT CTN 1703 trial of post-transplant cyclophosphamide as graft-versus-host disease (GvHD) prophylaxis and assessed dissemination and adoption considerations for the upcoming BMT CTN 2203 CT of ruxolitinib as GvHD prophylaxis. CIBMTR data is being analyzed to demonstrate practice patterns before, during, and after BMT CTN 1703 study completion. This effort has allowed for further refinement of the BMT CTN D+I process flow and has highlighted critical opportunities for incorporating dissemination and implementation objectives and endpoints into BMT CTN protocols. We also used the process to guide a review of severe aplastic anemia treatment gaps and ongoing studies. This review underscored how proactive transplant and non-transplant stakeholder engagement and early implementation planning, core elements of this process, can bridge evidence to practice and advance access to care. A complementary survey on current practice patterns in severe aplastic anemia is ongoing. Conclusions: With the existing structure of the BMT CTN and associated practice registry of the CIBMTR, the BMT CTN D+I Committee developed a systematic process to build D+I considerations into trial workflows to increase real-world impact. This process aims to ensure that barriers to uptake of trial results can be identified and addressed appropriately, improving care quality for patients undergoing TCT.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Blood
Published
2025-11-03
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1182/blood-2025-7913
Primary Topic
Health Policy Implementation Science
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Upstream integration of implementation planning in clinical trials through the blood and marrow transplant clinical trials network

Alla Keyzner, Azra Borogovac, Mark Juckett, Steven M. Devine et al.
Blood
Health Policy Implementation Science
article

Upstream integration of implementation planning in clinical trials through the blood and marrow transplant clinical trials network

Alla Keyzner, Azra Borogovac, Mark Juckett, Steven M. Devine, Mitchell E. Horwitz, Brittany Knick Ragon, Neel S. Bhatt, Betty K. Hamilton, Todd D. Molfenter, Yvonne A. Efebera, Nandita Khera, Sarah Wall, Christopher E. Dandoy, Michael Heuer, John P. Plastaras, Anna M. DeSalvo, Valerie Stewart, Mary Horowitz
article en

Abstract

Abstract Background: Dissemination and implementation science (D+I) efforts often begin after clinical trial (CT) efficacy data are available. However, delaying this work limits opportunities to identify barriers and facilitators that can enhance adoption of evidence-based practices. Integrating D+I during trial development, activation, and conduct supports more timely, effective, and scalable implementation. The Blood and Marrow Transplant Clinical Trials Network (BMT CTN) includes >125 centers, conducting transplant and cellular therapy (TCT) trials with practice-changing potential, with >17,000 patients enrolled since 2001. Data from Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR) provides a way to measure real-world adoption. With this comprehensive structure in place, the BMT CTN launched a D+I Committee that established a D+I process to better understand uptake of CT findings and to leverage that information to promote adoption. Methods: Informed by established D+I frameworks, a structured, cyclical process to integrate implementation considerations spanning the CT lifecycle was developed. A multidisciplinary team including experts in D+I, clinicians, and investigators iteratively refined the proposed D+I algorithm. The process begins upstream when a trial concept is approved to move forward, it is shared with the D+I Committee for initial assessment. This includes a landscape review for studies in development using CIBMTR data, literature, and expert experience. The Committee then reviews the developing protocol with the BMT CTN protocol team to proactively identify implementation barriers and facilitators to implementation in real-world settings and outline plans for dissemination. The Committee also provides recommendations for integrating relevant implementation data collection and analyses within the protocol. After study completion, both clinical efficacy and implementation outcomes are analyzed, followed by active dissemination. Additional assessment using surveys, qualitative methods, and CIBMTR data occurs after dissemination to understand adoption. Insights gathered also inform further refinement of the process. Tools and templates are in development to build capacity and ensure consistency for Committee members. Results: To date, the Committee has published three peer-reviewed articles addressing implementation implications of three BMT CTN trials (PMC7735536, PMC8578257, PMC9364468) and a fourth is in press. Using the designed D+I process flow, a current effort used a survey sent to US CIBMTR centers, to evaluate factors influencing the implementation of results of the BMT CTN 1703 trial of post-transplant cyclophosphamide as graft-versus-host disease (GvHD) prophylaxis and assessed dissemination and adoption considerations for the upcoming BMT CTN 2203 CT of ruxolitinib as GvHD prophylaxis. CIBMTR data is being analyzed to demonstrate practice patterns before, during, and after BMT CTN 1703 study completion. This effort has allowed for further refinement of the BMT CTN D+I process flow and has highlighted critical opportunities for incorporating dissemination and implementation objectives and endpoints into BMT CTN protocols. We also used the process to guide a review of severe aplastic anemia treatment gaps and ongoing studies. This review underscored how proactive transplant and non-transplant stakeholder engagement and early implementation planning, core elements of this process, can bridge evidence to practice and advance access to care. A complementary survey on current practice patterns in severe aplastic anemia is ongoing. Conclusions: With the existing structure of the BMT CTN and associated practice registry of the CIBMTR, the BMT CTN D+I Committee developed a systematic process to build D+I considerations into trial workflows to increase real-world impact. This process aims to ensure that barriers to uptake of trial results can be identified and addressed appropriately, improving care quality for patients undergoing TCT.

BloodVol. 146(Supplement 1)
OhioHealth (US), Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center (US), University of Minnesota (US), University of Wisconsin System (US), Cleveland Clinic (US), National Marrow Donor Program (US), Cape Town HVTN Immunology Laboratory / Hutchinson Centre Research Institute of South Africa (ZA), University of Wisconsin–Madison (US), Medical College of Wisconsin (US), University of Minnesota System (US), Fred Hutch Cancer Center (US), Levine Cancer Institute (US), Duke Institute for Health Innovation (US), Tisch Hospital (US), Duke University Health System (US), TOCA at Banner Health (US), Hope Foundation (US), The Ohio State University (US), University of Pennsylvania (US), Philadelphia University (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 45%
Health Policy Implementation Science
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.