Dr. Anna Maria V. Storniolo, director of the Division of Biospecimen Collection and Biobanking Core at the Indiana University Melvin and Bren Simon Comprehensive Cancer Center, and her team are responsible for the comprehensive management of all biospecimen samples at the center.
The core consists of blood, tissue samples and clinical data from cancer patients, as well as donations of tissue, blood and medical history from more than 5,000 women to The Komen Tissue Bank, the world’s only biodepot of normal breast tissue.
THE PROBLEM
“As you can imagine, efficiently collecting, storing, distributing, and cataloging these samples is a complex undertaking,” Storniolo said. “When the core was launched, samples were managed in different databases and there was no standard procedure for how each one was organized.
“The administrative burden of managing the various systems meant that research queries could take weeks to complete, and data generation efforts were often duplicated across projects,” she noted. “The process was incredibly time-consuming for the team charged with supporting this work, as much of the searching was done manually.”
In the genomics era, healthcare can gain many insights across time, populations, and individuals. To take full advantage of this, the cancer center must simplify the process of accessing information. Scientists are experts in their field with limited time. They need easy-to-use tools that give them accurate and reliable information.
“We need to demystify and synthesize the data across platforms to answer the questions that drive research,” Storniolo explained. “This requires tools that can communicate across complex databases, so that researchers are less dependent on limited IT resources.”
PROPOSAL
The IU Cancer Center needed a platform that could handle the volume of data in its data “universe” and the complexities that come with the different types of data, both structured and unstructured. A clinical data platform promised to harmonize all available data and create a shared resource for the cancer center, connecting biospecimen data with clinical and genetic data in a single, accessible tool.
“The platform would allow the team to quickly answer questions about specific cohorts and better collaborate with research teams,” Storniolo said. “The assurance that patient privacy and data security would be preserved, while allowing for faster, easier democratization between partners, was huge.”
TOOK UP THE CHALLENGE
The cancer center and the clinical data platform provider worked closely together to build a data system that very specifically addressed the needs of the center as a biobank and the needs of the researchers as users of that biobank and its data..
“While the project is still being built and tested, one of the biggest impacts we’ve seen so far is the speed,” Storniolo noted. “In the past, if a scientist had to look at a certain number of patients with specific parameters — such as age, details of cancer biology and type of treatment — it would take several days to a week to determine how many samples met the criteria, where they were located and whether they were accessible to the researcher requesting them.”
Thanks to the platform, this can now be done within minutes, she added.
RESULTS
The IU Cancer Center expects to process more and more complex research requests in the coming year and to spend less time on manual tasks and generating duplicate research data.
“Our researchers can check the availability of samples in real time on a self-service basis,” Storniolo reported. “This allows them to determine the feasibility of projects or generate ideas for new projects more quickly than they can now because of the bottlenecks of limited staff who can currently perform these searches.”
By the end of the year, employees expect the following:
- 50% reduction in time spent on manual tasks and reduced duplicate generation of research data, resulting in an overall reduction in ongoing operational costs.
- Significant reduction in time per request (from months to minutes).
- 50% increase in the number of supported research projects.
ADVICE FOR OTHERS
“The first step is to ask your researchers what they need and find a technology provider who is willing to adapt and keep pace with changes in the industry,” Storniolo advised. “We don’t know everything that’s in the pipeline, and how we think about science is constantly changing, so working with developers who are true collaborators and can adapt to user needs is essential.
“When you think about technology needs, you often have to consider what is needed now and what needs will arise in the future, because science is constantly changing,” she continues.
In addition to user needs, efficiency is an important consideration, she added.
“The complexity and depth of today’s scientific data often results in a lot of manual work,” she said. “It’s critical to understand where you can gain efficiency with technology. You’ll want to think about where you can create the most value for researchers by eliminating some of that manual work.”
“In general, embracing technology may seem like a challenge, but our goal here is to empower science, not limit it,” she concluded. “With the right technology, your teams can make data more accessible and accelerate research, fueling innovation and breakthroughs.”
Follow Bill’s HIT reporting on LinkedIn: Bill Siwicki
Send him an email: bsiwicki@himss.org
Healthcare IT News is a publication of HIMSS Media.