Page History

CRF Round 5 Review 2

For this review each tab has the results of the first review in column J.  Any comment or item you wish to make for any entry should be added to column K.  Cells that are shaded yellow have particular importance to the review.  These are items in which significant changes or questions were raised in the first review.  Please comment on these yellow cells also in column K. 

When finished please save your spreadsheet and mail it to Neesha Desai, neesha.desai@nih.gov, by the close of business, June 23, 2014. Following this second review the content will be edited as needed and released for community use.  The only exception is the Recist module; the data element sin the Recist 1.1 module will be used to build CRFs in Rave as one indicator that we have the correct and sufficient set of data elements.  

CRF Round 5 Review 2 Reviewer Form06-2014_Round_5_Review_2_Updated_Spreadsheet-508_Compl.xlsx (Excel)

CRF Round 5 Final Review Comments October 2014

CRF Round 5 Review 1 Comments/Review Sheets

Please find below the Round 5 Review 1 comments.  In the interest of increased transparency and including the community in standards activities, the actual reviewer spreadsheets are included below.

Round 5 Feedback Inventory less RECIST06-2014_Round_5_Review_2_Updated_Spreadsheet-508_Compl.xlsx (Excel)

• ACRIN ECOG Comments
• Alliance Comments
• CCR Comments
• CIP Comments
• CCR Comments
• COG SDC Comments
• COG SDC Comments
• CIP Comments
• CTEP BC Comments
• Daniel Rubin Comments
• CTEP BC Comments
• ECOG Comments
• GOG Comments
• RTOG Comments
• SWOG Comments
• Vanderbilt Comments

CRF Round 5 Community Review

The fifth round of NCI Case Report Form (CRF) Harmonization and Standardization activity has been completed, and is ready for formal community review.  Your feedback is invited at this point, to prepare the content for community adoption and implementation. 

Please mark your calendar!!! 

The two week review period for this content will begin after Thanksgiving, on Friday December 6^th, 2013 and conclude by close of business Friday December 20^th, 2013. 

The following content will be included in the Round 5 formal Community review: 

• Imaging
  • CT Image Acquisition
  • Image Administration
  • CT Imaging Agent
  • RECIST
  Survival/Death/Follow-up
• Lost to follow-up
• Survival
• Follow-up
• Progression
• Response/Procedures/Results
  • Response
• Diagnosis/Pathology
  • Diagnosis
  • Diagnosis Gross Pathology
  • Diagnosis Metastasis
  • Diagnosis Microscopic Pathology

Round 5 Spreadsheet

** The combined multi-tab reviewer spreadsheet is named 'Round 5 Reviewer Form MASTER 12.6.2013', and is attached here. 

Please refer to resources and information on the wiki to review the guidelines for review of this type document.  The far right column on each tab of the spreadsheet is the spot to add in your comments, questions, and recommendations.

CRF Round 5 Reviewer Form (Excel)

1. To help you with several elements that have extensive sets of permissible values, the green tabs in the spreadsheet detail some of the CDEs that appear in the modules. 

2. The RECIST v1.1 module is based on an extensive analysis of the NCI guidelines by a combined team from the NCI, FDA and CDISC.  We ask that you review this module to confirm the definitions are clear and precise.

3. There are some imaging modules included that need review and comment from our members who have biomedical imaging expertise.  If you feel you do not have that level of expertise in your organization, please feel at liberty to skip these modules.

4. The Diagnosis module included an element for MedDRA codes to describe overall diagnosis.  The element identified is the set of Simplified Disease Codes (SDC) used in CDS reporting.  If any group is collecting - not reporting - diagnosis data using other coding systems, we would like you to share that information on the reviewer form. 

5. Several modules use CDEs that include anatomic sites in the body.  We invite your recommendation on whether the same list of anatomic site codes should be used in every case of asking a question about an anatomic site.  The full list of values could be subset, but should the full list of values ALWAYS be the same?

If there are any questions about the review or the modules, please feel free to contact Dianne Reeves (reevesd@mail.nih.gov) or Neesha Desai (neesha.desai@nih.gov) for assistance.

Round 5 Timeline

The Round 5 Review 1 will start on Friday December 6^th, 2013 and end on Friday December 20^th, 2013.   If you find for any reason that you cannot complete the review by the end of December, please notify Dianne Reeves or Neesha Desai to advise us when to expect your comments.

The completed review sheets should be returned to Neesha Desai (neesha.desai@nih.gov) and Dianne Reeves (reevesd@mail.nih.gov).  If more than one person from an organization participated in the review, we would like those names for inclusion on this wiki.

Calendar

Round 5 Comment Tracking Log

Working Groups Main Page