Participation of the elderly, women, and minorities in pivotal trials supporting 2011-2013 U.S. Food and Drug Administration approvals

The Ethics of Cancer Screening Based on Race and Ethnicity

Racial and ethnic disparities in incidence and mortality are well documented for many types of cancer. As a result, there is understandable policy and clinical interest in race- and ethnicity-based clinical screening guidelines to address cancer health disparities. Despite the theoretical benefits, such proposals do not typically address associated ethical considerations. Using the examples of gastric cancer and esophageal adenocarcinoma, which have demonstrated disparities according to race and ethnicity, this article examines relevant ethical arguments in considering screening based on race and ethnicity.

Race- and ethnicity-based clinical preventive care services have the potential to improve the balance of harms and benefits of screening. As a result, programs focused on high-risk racial or ethnic groups could offer a practical alternative to screening the general population, in which the screening yield may be too low to demonstrate sufficient effectiveness. However, designing screening according to socially based categorizations such as race or ethnicity is controversial and has the potential for intersectional stigma related to social identity or other structurally mediated environmental factors. Other ethical considerations include miscategorization, unintended negative effects on health disparities, disregard for underlying risk factors, and the psychological costs of being assigned higher risk.

Given the ethical considerations, the practical application of race and ethnicity in cancer screening is most relevant in multicultural countries if and only if alternative proxies are not available. Even in those instances, policymakers and clinicians should carefully address the ethical considerations within the historical and cultural context of the intended population. Further research on alternative proxies, such as social determinants of health and culturally based characteristics, could provide more adequate factors for risk stratification.

Challenging assumptions about the demographics of eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases: A systematic review

Background

The demographic characteristics of patients with eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases (EGIDs) are poorly understood. Population-based assessments of EGID demographics may indicate health disparities in diagnosis.

Objectives

We aimed to characterize the demographic distribution of EGIDs and evaluate the potential for bias in reporting patient characteristics.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review, extracting data on age, sex, gender, race, ethnicity, body mass index, insurance, and urban/rural residence on EGID patients and the source population. Differences in proportions were assessed by chi-square tests. Demographic reporting was compared to recent guidelines.

Results

Among 50 studies that met inclusion/exclusion criteria, 12 reported ≥1 demographic feature in both EGID and source populations. Except for age and sex or gender, demographics were rarely described (race = 4, ethnicity = 1, insurance = 1) or were not described (body mass index, urban/rural residence). A higher proportion of male subjects was observed for EoE or esophageal eosinophilia relative to the source population, but no difference in gender or sex distribution was observed for other EGIDs. "Sex" and "gender" were used interchangeably, and frequently only the male proportion was reported. Reporting of race and ethnicity was inconsistent with guidelines.

Conclusion

Current data support a male predominance for EoE only. Evidence was insufficient to support enrichment of EGIDs in any particular racial, ethnic, or other demographic group. Population-based studies presenting demographics on both cases and source populations are needed. Implementation of guidelines for more inclusive reporting of demographic characteristics is crucial to prevent disparities in timely diagnosis and management of patients with EGIDs.

Reporting of Demographics & Subgroup Analyses in Premarketing Studies of FDA Approved High-Risk Cardiovascular Devices, 2014-2022

Background

Representation of diverse study populations in pivotal clinical trials for medical devices and subgroup analyses for demographic groups to explore differences in safety and effectiveness are essential to understanding the benefits and risks in diverse populations. The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has taken many steps to improve transparency and subgroup analyses over the past decade, but there has not been a recent evaluation of demographic reporting and subgroup analyses.

Methods

We reviewed all FDA Premarket Approvals for high-risk cardiovascular devices from 2014 to 2022, focusing on pivotal studies supporting device approval. We abstracted detailed demographic data about the age, sex, race, ethnicity, and socioeconomic position of study participants. We also assessed the presence and results of subgroup analyses to understand the safety and effectiveness of devices across trial populations.

Results

Analysis of 92 pivotal studies revealed that age and sex were reported in 96.7% of the studies, while race and ethnicity were reported in 71.7% and 58.7%, respectively. However, only 7.9% of studies explicitly detailed the participation of older adults (≥65 years) and no studies reported patients' socioeconomic position. Subgroup analyses by sex were conducted in 70.7% of studies, with 12.3% reporting significant differences. In contrast, analyses by race and ethnicity were performed in only 12.0% of the studies, with 9.1% reporting significant differences.

Conclusion

Approximately one-third of pivotal studies for high-risk cardiovascular devices approved by the FDA from 2014 to 2022 did not report the race of study participants, nearly 40% did not report ethnicity, and more than 90% did not report the participation of older adults (≥65 years). Subgroup analyses were infrequently conducted by age or race and ethnicity. There is a need for better trial demographic reporting and conduct of subgroup analyses in premarketing studies to ensure the safety and effectiveness of medical devices for all patients.

Effectiveness of glucose-lowering medications on cardiovascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes at moderate cardiovascular risk

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of death among people with type 2 diabetes1-5, most of whom are at moderate CVD risk6, yet there is limited evidence on the preferred choice of glucose-lowering medication for CVD risk reduction in this population. Here, we report the results of a retrospective cohort study where data for US adults with type 2 diabetes and moderate risk for CVD are used to compare the risks of experiencing a major adverse cardiovascular event with initiation of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RA; n = 44,188), sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i; n = 47,094), dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP4i; n = 84,315) and sulfonylureas (n = 210,679). Compared to DPP4i, GLP-1RA (hazard ratio (HR) 0.87; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.82-0.93) and SGLT2i (HR 0.85; 95% CI 0.81-0.90) were associated with a lower risk of a major adverse cardiovascular event, whereas sulfonylureas were associated with a higher risk (HR 1.19; 95% CI 1.16-1.22). Thus, GLP-1RA and SGLT2i may be the preferred glucose-lowering agents for cardiovascular risk reduction in patients at moderate baseline risk for CVD. ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT05214573.

Access to cancer clinical trials for racialised older adults: an equity-focused rapid scoping review protocol

BACKGROUND

The intersection of race and older age compounds existing health disparities experienced by historically marginalised communities. Therefore, racialised older adults with cancer are more disadvantaged in their access to cancer clinical trials compared with age-matched counterparts. To determine what has already been published in this area, the rapid scoping review question are: what are the barriers, facilitators and potential solutions for enhancing access to cancer clinical trials among racialised older adults?

METHODS

We will use a rapid scoping review methodology in which we follow the six-step framework of Arksey and O'Malley, including a systematic search of the literature with abstract and full-text screening to be conducted by two independent reviewers, data abstraction by one reviewer and verification by a second reviewer using an Excel data abstraction sheet. Articles focusing on persons aged 18 and over who identify as a racialised person with cancer, that describe therapies/therapeutic interventions/prevention/outcomes related to barriers, facilitators and solutions to enhancing access to and equity in cancer clinical trials will be eligible for inclusion in this rapid scoping review.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

All data will be extracted from published literature. Hence, ethical approval and patient informed consent are not required. The findings of the scoping review will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presentation at international conferences.

Systems Anesthesiology: Systems of Care Delivery and Optimization in the Operating Room

Anesthesiology presents a challenge to a traditional simplifying approach given the ever-increasing amount of medical data and a more demanding environment. Systems anesthesiology is a modern approach to perioperative care, integrating the complexity of multifactorial knowledge and data to achieve a more adequate representation of reality, while including both patient-related medical aspects as well as economic and organizational challenges. We discuss the value of some innovative technologies such as the emergence of anesthesia information systems, the use of tele-medicine, predictive monitoring, or closed-loop systems as it pertains to the changes in the current standards of care in anesthesiology. Furthermore, we highlight the importance of systems anesthesiology in operating room planning, anesthesia research, and education.

Factors Associated with Pre-Research Recruitment in Autism and Related Developmental Disorders

PURPOSE

Access to research programs and increased diversity in research enrollment may be key to improving diverse populations' health and healthcare outcomes. To facilitate research recruitment, a Research Registry ("Registry"), a pre-recruitment database, was developed at an urban tertiary Autism Center ("Autism Center"). In this study, we examined whether disparities in research participation occur in the pre-research recruitment (pre-recruitment) stage.

METHODS

We compared demographic factors of patients seen at the Autism Center (but not enrolled in the Registry) vs. patients enrolled in the Registry. We also examined whether demographic factors differ among the Registry participants who were enrolled in the Registry by signing an informed consent form (ICF) vs. by returning a research interest form (RIF).

RESULTS

A total of 18,522 patients (including 1092 patients in the Registry with 403 patients via ICF and 689 patients via RIF) were included in this study. English as the primary language, White race, Non-Hispanic ethnicity, and younger age at their first clinic encounter were associated with the Registry. In the Registry sample, the RIF group had a higher proportion of non-English as a primary language, Medicaid insurance, longer distance from the Autism Center, and lower median household income (based on their ZIP code) than the ICF group.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that disparities may have existed in the pre-research recruitment stage. To achieve equity in both clinical and research advancements in autism and related developmental disorders, further efforts are needed to equitably disseminate research opportunities to patients of diverse backgrounds.

The gamification of nutrition labels to encourage healthier food selection in online grocery shopping: A randomized controlled trial

Food purchase choices, one of the main determinants of food consumption, is highly influenced by food environments. Given the surge in online grocery shopping because of the COVID-19 pandemic, interventions in digital environments present more than ever an opportunity to improve the nutritional quality of food purchase choices. One such opportunity can be found in gamification. Participants (n = 1228) shopped for 12 items from a shopping list on a simulated online grocery platform. We randomized them into four groups in a 2 × 2 factorial design: presence vs. absence of gamification, and high vs. low budget. Participants in the gamification groups saw foods with 1 (least nutritious) to 5 (most nutritious) crown icons and a scoreboard with a tally of the number of crowns the participant collected. We estimated ordinary least squares and Poisson regression models to test the impact of the gamification and budget on the nutritional quality of the shopping basket. In the absence of gamification and low budget, participants collected 30.78 (95% CI [30.27; 31.29]) crowns. In the gamification and low budget condition, participants increased the nutritional quality of their shopping basket by collecting more crowns (B = 4.15, 95% CI [3.55; 4.75], p < 0.001). The budget amount ($50 vs. $30) did not alter the final shopping basket (B = 0.45, 95% CI [-0.02; 1.18], p = 0.057), nor moderated the gamification effect. Gamification increased the nutritional quality of the final shopping baskets and nine of 12 shopping list items in this hypothetical experiment. Gamifying nutrition labels may be an effective strategy to improve the nutritional quality of food choices in online grocery stores, but further research is needed.

What, Where, and How to Collect Real-World Data and Generate Real-World Evidence to Support Drug Reimbursement Decision-Making in Asia: A reflection Into the Past and A Way Forward

BACKGROUND

Globally, there is increasing interest in the use of real-world data (RWD) and real-world evidence (RWE) to inform health technology assessment (HTA) and reimbursement decision-making. Using current practices and case studies shared by eleven health systems in Asia, a non-binding guidance that seeks to align practices for generating and using RWD/RWE for decision-making in Asia was developed by the REAL World Data In ASia for HEalth Technology Assessment in Reimbursement (REALISE) Working Group, addressing a current gap and needs among HTA users and generators.

METHODS

The guidance document was developed over two face-to-face workshops, in addition to an online survey, a face-to-face interview and pragmatic search of literature. The specific focus was on what, where and how to collect RWD/ RWE.

RESULTS

All 11 REALISE member jurisdictions participated in the online survey and the first in-person workshop, 10 participated in the second in-person workshop, and 8 participated in the in-depth face-to-face interviews. The guidance document was iteratively reviewed by all working group members and the International Advisory Panel. There was substantial variation in: (a) sources and types of RWD being used in HTA, and (b) the relative importance and prioritization of RWE being used for policy-making. A list of national-level databases and other sources of RWD available in each country was compiled. A list of useful guidance on data collection, quality assurance and study design were also compiled.

CONCLUSION

The REALISE guidance document serves to align the collection of better quality RWD and generation of reliable RWE to ultimately inform HTA in Asia.

Diversity in clinical research: public health and social justice imperatives

It is well established that demographic representation in clinical research is important for understanding the safety and effectiveness of novel therapeutics and vaccines in diverse patient populations. In recent years, the National Institutes of Health and Food and Drug Administration have issued guidelines and recommendations for the inclusion of women, older adults, and racial and ethnic minorities in research. However, these guidelines fail to provide an adequate explanation of why racial and ethnic representation in clinical research is important. This article aims to both provide the missing arguments for why adequate representation of racial and ethnic minorities in clinical research is essential and to articulate a number of recommendations for improving diversity going forward.Appropriate racial and ethnic representation and fair inclusion help (1) increase the generalisability of clinical trial results, (2) equitably distribute any benefits of clinical research and (3) enable trust in the research enterprise.

High-Throughput Assessment of Real-World Medication Effects on QT Interval Prolongation: Observational Study

BACKGROUND

Drug-induced prolongation of the corrected QT interval (QTc) increases the risk for Torsades de Pointes (TdP) and sudden cardiac death. Medication effects on the QTc have been studied in controlled settings but may not be well evaluated in real-world settings where medication effects may be modulated by patient demographics and comorbidities as well as the usage of other concomitant medications.

OBJECTIVE

We demonstrate a new, high-throughput method leveraging electronic health records (EHRs) and the Surescripts pharmacy database to monitor real-world QTc-prolonging medication and potential interacting effects from demographics and comorbidities.

METHODS

We included all outpatient electrocardiograms (ECGs) from September 2008 to December 2019 at a large academic medical system, which were in sinus rhythm with a heart rate of 40-100 beats per minute, QRS duration of <120 milliseconds, and QTc of 300-700 milliseconds, determined using the Bazett formula. We used prescription information from the Surescripts pharmacy database and EHR medication lists to classify whether a patient was on a medication during an ECG. Negative control ECGs were obtained from patients not currently on the medication but who had been or would be on that medication within 1 year. We calculated the difference in mean QTc between ECGs of patients who are on and those who are off a medication and made comparisons to known medication TdP risks per the CredibleMeds.org database. Using linear regression analysis, we studied the interaction of patient-level demographics or comorbidities on medication-related QTc prolongation.

RESULTS

We analyzed the effects of 272 medications on 310,335 ECGs from 159,397 individuals. Medications associated with the greatest QTc prolongation were dofetilide (mean QTc difference 21.52, 95% CI 10.58-32.70 milliseconds), mexiletine (mean QTc difference 18.56, 95% CI 7.70-29.27 milliseconds), amiodarone (mean QTc difference 14.96, 95% CI 13.52-16.33 milliseconds), rifaximin (mean QTc difference 14.50, 95% CI 12.12-17.13 milliseconds), and sotalol (mean QTc difference 10.73, 95% CI 7.09-14.37 milliseconds). Several top QT prolonging medications such as rifaximin, lactulose, cinacalcet, and lenalidomide were not previously known but have plausible mechanistic explanations. Significant interactions were observed between demographics or comorbidities and QTc prolongation with many medications, such as coronary disease and amiodarone.

CONCLUSIONS

We demonstrate a new, high-throughput technique for monitoring real-world effects of QTc-prolonging medications from readily accessible clinical data. Using this approach, we confirmed known medications for QTc prolongation and identified potential new associations and demographic or comorbidity interactions that could supplement findings in curated databases. Our single-center results would benefit from additional verification in future multisite studies that incorporate larger numbers of patients and ECGs along with more precise medication adherence and comorbidity data.

Omecamtiv Mecarbil in Black Patients With Heart Failure and Reduced Ejection Fraction: Insights From GALACTIC-HF

BACKGROUND

Omecamtiv mecarbil improves cardiovascular outcomes in patients with heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (EF). Consistency of drug benefit across race is a key public health topic.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of omecamtiv mecarbil among self-identified Black patients.

METHODS

In GALACTIC-HF (Global Approach to Lowering Adverse Cardiac Outcomes Through Improving Contractility in Heart Failure) patients with symptomatic HF, elevated natriuretic peptides, and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤35% were randomized to omecamtiv mecarbil or placebo. The primary outcome was a composite of time to first event of HF or cardiovascular death. The authors analyzed treatment effects in Black vs White patients in countries contributing at least 10 Black participants.

RESULTS

Black patients accounted for 6.8% (n = 562) of overall enrollment and 29% of U.S. enrollment. Most Black patients enrolled in the United States, South Africa, and Brazil (n = 535, 95%). Compared with White patients enrolled from these countries (n = 1,129), Black patients differed in demographics, comorbid conditions, received higher rates of medical therapy and lower rates of device therapies, and experienced higher overall event rates. The effect of omecamtiv mecarbil was consistent in Black vs White patients, with no difference in the primary endpoint (HR = 0.83 vs 0.88, P-interaction = 0.66), similar improvements in heart rate and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide, and no significant safety signals. Among endpoints, the only nominally significant treatment-by-race interaction was the placebo-corrected change in blood pressure from baseline in Black vs White patients (+3.4 vs -0.7 mm Hg, P-interaction = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

GALACTIC-HF enrolled more Black patients than other recent HF trials. Black patients treated with omecamtiv mecarbil had similar benefit and safety compared with White counterparts.

Metrics, baseline scores, and a tool to improve sponsor performance on clinical trial diversity: retrospective cross sectional study

Objective

To develop a measure for fair inclusion in pivotal trials by assessing transparency and representation of enrolled women, older adults (aged 65 years and older), and racially and ethnically minoritized patients.

Design

Retrospective cross sectional study.

Population

Sponsors of novel oncology therapeutics that were approved by the US Food and Drug Administration over 1 January 2012 to 31 December 2017.

Data sources

Trial data from Drugs@FDA, ClinicalTrials.gov, and corresponding publications; cancer incidence demographics from US Cancer Statistics and the American Cancer Society.

Main outcome measures

Transparency measures assess whether trials publicly report participant sex, age, and racial and ethnic identity. Representation measures assess whether trial participant demographics represent more than 80% of the US patient population for studied conditions, calculated by dividing the percentage of study participants in each demographic subgroup by the percentage of the US cancer population with the studied condition per group. Composite fair inclusion measures assess average transparency and representation scores, overall and for each demographic group. Results are reported at the trial, product, and sponsor levels.

Results

Between 1 January 2012 and 31 December 2017, the FDA approved 59 novel cancer therapeutics, submitted by 25 sponsors (all industry companies) on the basis of 64 pivotal trials. All 25 sponsors (100%) reported participant sex, 10 (40%) reported age, and six (24%) reported race and ethnicity. Although 14 (56%) sponsors had adequate representation of women in trials, only six (24%) adequately represented older adults, and four (16%) adequately represented racially and ethnically minoritized patients (black, Asian, Hispanic or Latinx). On overall fair inclusion, one sponsor scored 100% and the median sponsor score was 81% (interquartile range 75-87%). More than half of sponsors (13 (56%) of 25) fairly included women, 20% (n=5) fairly included older adults, and 4% (n=1) fairly included racially and ethnically minoritized patients in trials. 80% of product had pivotal trials that fairly included women, 24% fairly included older adults, and 5% fairly included racially and ethnically minoritized patients.

Conclusions

This novel approach evaluates trials, products, and sponsors on their fair inclusion of demographic groups in research. For oncology trials, substantial room was noted for improved inclusion of older adults and patients who identify as black or Latinx and transparency around the number of participants identifying as Native Hawaiian, Pacific Islander, American Indian, and Alaska Native. These measures can be used by sponsors, ethics committees, among others, to set and evaluate trial diversity goals to help spur progress toward greater research equity in the US.

Axes of social inequities in COVID-19 clinical trials: A systematic review

Objective

The representativeness of participants is crucial to ensure external validity of clinical trials. We focused on the randomized clinical trials which assessed COVID-19 vaccines to assess the reporting of age, sex, gender identity, race, ethnicity, obesity, sexual orientation, and socioeconomic status in the results (description of the participants' characteristics, loss of follow-up, stratification of efficacy and safety results).

Methods

We searched the following databases for randomized clinical trials published before 1st February 2022: PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Excerpta Medica. We included peer-reviewed articles written in English or Spanish. Four researchers used the Rayyan platform to filter citations, first reading the title and abstract, and then accessing the full text. Articles were excluded if both reviewers agreed, or if a third reviewer decided to discard them.

Results

Sixty three articles were included, which assessed 20 different vaccines, mainly in phase 2 or 3. When describing the participants' characteristics, all the studies reported sex or gender, 73.0% race, ethnicity, 68.9% age groups, and 22.2% obesity. Only one article described the age of participants lost to follow-up. Efficacy results were stratified by age in 61.9%, sex or gender in 26.9%, race and/or, ethnicity in 9.5%, and obesity in 4.8% of the articles. Safety results were stratified by age in 41.0%, and by sex or gender in 7.9% of the analysis. Reporting of gender identity, sexual orientation or socioeconomic status of participants was rare. Parity was reached in 49.2% of the studies, and sex-specific outcomes were mentioned in 22.9% of the analysis, most of the latter were related to females' health.

Conclusions

Axes of social inequity other than age and sex were hardly reported in randomized clinical trials that assessed COVID-19 vaccines. This undermines their representativeness and external validity and sustains health inequities.

Underrepresentation of women in randomized controlled trials: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Although regulatory changes towards correcting the underrepresentation of women in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) occurred (National Institutes of Health 1994), concerns exist about whether an improvement is taking place. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to assess the inclusion rates of women in recent RCTs and to explore the potential barriers for the enrollment of women.

METHODS

RCTs published in 2017 examining any type of intervention in adults were searched in PubMed and Cochrane Library. The following predefined medical fields were included: cardiovascular diseases, neoplasms, endocrine system diseases, respiratory tract diseases, bacterial and fungal infections, viral diseases, digestive system diseases, and immune system diseases. Studies were screened independently by two reviewers, and an equal number of studies was randomly selected per calendric month. The primary outcome was the enrollment rate of women, calculated as the number of randomized women patients divided by the total number of randomized patients. Rates were weighted by their inverse variance; statistical significance was tested using general linear models (GLM).

RESULTS

Out of 398 RCTs assessed for eligibility, 300 RCTs were included. The enrollment rate of women in all the examined fields was lower than 50%, except for immune system diseases [median enrollment rate of 68% (IQR 46 to 81)]. The overall median enrollment rate of women was 41% (IQR 27 to 54). The median enrollment rate of women decreased with older age of the trials' participants [mean age of trials' participants ≤ 45 years: 47% (IQR 30-64), 46-55 years: 46% (IQR 33-58), 56-62 years: 38% (IQR 27-50), ≥ 63 years: 33% (IQR 20-46), p < 0.001]. Methodological quality characteristics showed no significant association with the enrollment rates of women. Out of the 300 included RCTs, eleven did not report on the number of included women. There was no significant difference between these studies and the studies included in the analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Women are being inadequately represented, in the selected medical fields analyzed in our study, in recent RCTs. Older age is a potential barrier for the enrollment of women in clinical trials. Low inclusion rates of elderly women might create a lack of crucial knowledge in the adverse effects and the benefit/risk profile of any given treatment. Factors that might hinder the participation of women should be sought and addressed in the design of the study.

Biases, Barriers, and Possible Solutions: Steps Towards Addressing Autism Researchers Under-Engagement with Racially, Ethnically, and Socioeconomically Diverse Communities

Autistic individuals who are also people of color or from lower socioeconomic strata are historically underrepresented in research. Lack of representation in autism research has contributed to health and healthcare disparities. Reducing these disparities will require culturally competent research that is relevant to under-resourced communities as well as collecting large nationally representative samples, or samples in which traditionally disenfranchised groups are over-represented. To achieve these goals, a diverse group of culturally competent researchers must partner with and gain the trust of communities to identify and eliminate barriers to participating in research. We suggest community-academic partnerships as one promising approach that results in high-quality research built on cultural competency, respect, and shared decision making.

Agreement of treatment effects from observational studies and randomized controlled trials evaluating hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir-ritonavir, or dexamethasone for covid-19: meta-epidemiological study

OBJECTIVE

To systematically identify, match, and compare treatment effects and study demographics from individual or meta-analysed observational studies and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the same covid-19 treatments, comparators, and outcomes.

DESIGN

Meta-epidemiological study.

DATA SOURCES

National Institutes of Health Covid-19 Treatment Guidelines, a living review and network meta-analysis published in The BMJ, a living systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis in PLOS Medicine (The LIVING Project), and the Epistemonikos "Living OVerview of Evidence" (L·OVE) evidence database.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTION OF STUDIES

RCTs in The BMJ's living review that directly compared any of the three most frequently studied therapeutic interventions for covid-19 across all data sources (that is, hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir-ritonavir, or dexamethasone) for any safety and efficacy outcomes. Observational studies that evaluated the same interventions, comparisons, and outcomes that were reported in The BMJ's living review.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Safety and efficacy outcomes from observational studies were identified and treatment effects for dichotomous (odds ratios) or continuous (mean differences or ratios of means) outcomes were calculated and, when possible, meta-analyzed to match the treatment effects from individual RCTs or meta-analyses of RCTs reported in The BMJ's living review with the same interventions, comparisons, and outcomes (that is, matched pairs). The analysis compared the distribution of study demographics and the agreement between treatment effects from matched pairs. Matched pairs were in agreement if both observational and RCT treatment effects were significantly increasing or decreasing (P<0.05) or if both treatment effects were not significant (P≥0.05).

RESULTS

17 new, independent meta-analyses of observational studies were conducted that compared hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir-ritonavir, or dexamethasone with an active or placebo comparator for any safety or efficacy outcomes in covid-19 treatment. These studies were matched and compared with 17 meta-analyses of RCTs reported in The BMJ's living review. 10 additional matched pairs with only one observational study and/or one RCT were identified. Across all 27 matched pairs, 22 had adequate reporting of demographical and clinical data for all individual studies. All 22 matched pairs had studies with overlapping distributions of sex, age, and disease severity. Overall, 21 (78%) of the 27 matched pairs had treatment effects that were in agreement. Among the 17 matched pairs consisting of meta-analyses of observational studies and meta-analyses of RCTs, 14 (82%) were in agreement; seven (70%) of the 10 matched pairs consisting of at least one observational study or one RCT were in agreement. The 18 matched pairs with treatment effects for dichotomous outcomes had a higher proportion of agreement (n=16, 89%) than did the nine matched pairs with treatment effects for continuous outcomes (n=5, 56%).

CONCLUSIONS

Meta-analyses of observational studies and RCTs evaluating treatments for covid-19 have summary treatment effects that are generally in agreement. Although our evaluation is limited to three covid-19 treatments, these findings suggest that meta-analyzed evidence from observational studies might complement, but should not replace, evidence collected from RCTs.

Use of Extrapolation in New Drug Approvals by the US Food and Drug Administration

IMPORTANCE

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved indications can be factors in prescribing practices and insurance coverage, yet the frequency with which the extrapolation of clinical characteristics from pivotal trial data to the final approved indication occurs is not well understood.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the frequency of extrapolation beyond pivotal trial data into approved indications in relation to disease severity, disease subtype, and concomitant medication use.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

In a cross-sectional study, the characteristics of patients in pivotal trials of 105 novel drug approvals from 2015 to 2017 were identified and compared with the FDA-approved indications for the drugs. Main sources analyzed included FDA reviews, published material describing the pivotal trials, and the original drug labeling. The study was conducted from July 4, 2019, to June 1, 2021.

EXPOSURES

Clinical characteristics of pivotal trials used in FDA approval.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Main outcomes included the nature and frequency of extrapolation from study populations to the final indications. Extrapolation was defined as the granting of an indication for use in a broader population than was included in the pivotal trials on the basis of disease severity, disease subtype, or concomitant medication use.

RESULTS

Among the 105 novel FDA drug approvals studied, 23 extrapolations of trial population characteristics to the approved indication were identified in 21 drugs (20%): 12 times (29%) in 2015, 3 times (15%) in 2016, and 6 times (14%) in 2017. Extrapolation of trial findings to patients with greater disease severity was most common (n = 14 drugs), followed by differences in disease subtype (n = 6) and concomitant medication use (n = 3).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The findings of this study suggest that extrapolation from pivotal trial data to FDA-approved indications is common. Although extrapolations may be grounded in reasonable clinical predictions, they can limit the generalizability of such indications to specific prescribing decisions; these findings suggest a greater need for close postapproval monitoring to determine whether new safety issues arise, or effectiveness differs from expectations when these medications are used in broader real-world populations.

A Comparison of Recruitment Methods for a Prospective Cohort Study of Perinatal Psychoneuroimmunology among Black American Women

Improved understanding of perinatal psychoneuroimmunology is needed, particularly to combat the high rates of maternal and infant mortality witnessed among Black Americans. We compared the success of recruitment by advertisement, in person, or by phone during the course of a prospective cohort study of perinatal psychoneuroimmunology among Black American women. Over 24 months, 363 women were assessed and 96 were enrolled. Women recruited by phone were less likely to complete full screening than women recruited by advertisement (OR = 0.32, p < 0.01) or in person (OR = 0.19, p < 0.01). Women recruited by advertisement were less likely to complete full screening than women recruited in person (OR = 0.60, p = 0.05). Odds of unsuccessful contact were 13.2 and 11.5 times greater among women recruited by phone versus by advertisement or in person, respectively (p values ≤ 0.01). Women recruited by advertisement and in person showed similar odds of unsuccessful contact (OR = 0.87, p = 0.76). Odds of screening decline were similar following recruitment in person or by phone when contact was successful (OR = 0.85, p = 0.76). Focusing on eligible women (n = 142), those recruited in person were significantly less likely to enroll than those recruited by advertisement (OR = 0.28, p < 0.01; Fig. 4). Considering all women (n = 363), odds of enrollment did not significantly differ among the recruitment groups (p values ≥ 0.09). Most (93.8%) enrolled women consented to biological specimen banking. Findings from this brief report provide a starting point for perinatal scientists to critically consider not only how to maximize research efforts but also how research team actions may perpetuate or assuage the research mistrust introduced by long-standing social inequities.

Geographic Access Disparities of Clinical Trials in Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration in the United States

To identify geographic and socioeconomic variables predictive of residential proximity to neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) clinical trial locations.

DESIGN

Retrospective, cross-sectional study.

METHODS

Census tract-level data from public datasets and trial-level data from ClinicalTrials.gov were analyzed. We calculated the driving distance (>60 miles) and time (>60 minutes) from the population-weighted US census tract centroid to the nearest clinical trial site.

RESULTS

We identified 42 trials studying nAMD across 829 unique clinical trial sites in the United States. In a multivariable model, driving distance >60 miles had a significant association with rural location (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 5.54; 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.86-7.96, P < .0001) and with Midwest (aOR 2.30; 95% CI 1.21-4.38, P = .01) and South (aOR 2.43; 95% CI 1.21-4.91, P = .01) as compared to the Northeast region, and with some college or an associate's degree, as compared to a bachelor's degree (aOR 1.02; 95% CI 1.01-1.04, P = .0007, and aOR 1.05; 95% CI 1.00-1.10, P = .04, respectively). Lower odds of traveling >60 miles to the nearest nAMD trial site were associated with census tracts with a higher percentage of blacks (aOR 0.98; 95% CI 0.97-0.99, P < .0001), Hispanics (aOR 0.97; 95% CI 0.95-0.99, P = .002), and Asians (aOR 0.90; 95% CI 0.88-0.93, P < .0001), as compared to whites, and with a lower percentage of the population <200% of the federal poverty level. Similar predictors were found in time traveled >60 minutes.

CONCLUSIONS

There are geographic access disparities of clinical trial sites for nAMD in the United States.

Reporting of Study Participant Demographic Characteristics and Demographic Representation in Premarketing and Postmarketing Studies of Novel Cancer Therapeutics

Importance

Adequate representation of demographic subgroups in premarketing and postmarketing clinical studies is necessary for understanding the safety and efficacy associated with novel cancer therapeutics.

Objective

To characterize and compare the reporting of demographic data and the representation of individuals by sex, age, and race in premarketing and postmarketing studies used by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to evaluate novel cancer therapeutics.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this cross-sectional study, premarketing and postmarketing studies for novel cancer therapeutics approved by the FDA from 2012 through 2016 were identified. Study demographic information was abstracted from publicly available sources, and US cancer population demographic data was abstracted from US Cancer Statistics. Analyses were conducted from February 25 through September 21, 2020.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The percentages of trials reporting sex, age, and race/ethnicity were calculated, and participation to prevalence ratios (PPRs) were calculated by dividing the percentage of study participants in each demographic group by the percentage of the US cancer population in each group. PPRs were constructed for premarketing and postmarketing studies and by cancer type. Underrepresentation was defined as PPR less than 0.8.

Results

From 2012 through 2016, the FDA approved 45 cancer therapeutics. The study sample included 77 premarketing studies and 56 postmarketing studies. Postmarketing studies, compared with premarketing studies, were less likely to report patient sex (42 studies reporting [75.0%] vs 77 studies reporting [100%]; P < .001) and race (27 studies reporting [48.2%] vs 62 studies reporting [80.5%]; P < .001). Women were adequately represented in premarketing studies (mean [SD] PPR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.90-0.91) and postmarketing studies (mean PPR, 1.00; 95% CI, 1.00-1.01). Although older adults and Black patients were underrepresented in premarketing studies (older adults: mean PPR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.72-0.74; Black patients: mean PPR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.31-0.32), these groups continued to be underrepresented in postmarketing studies (older adults: mean PPR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.75-0.76; Black patients: mean PPR, 0.21; 95% CI, 0.21-0.21).

Conclusions and Relevance

This study found that older adults and Black patients were underrepresented in postmarketing studies of novel cancer therapeutics to a similar degree that they were underrepresented in premarketing studies. These findings suggest that postmarketing studies are not associated with improvements to gaps in demographic representation present at the time of FDA approval.

Quality of life for older patients with cancer: a review of the evidence supporting melatonin use

Purpose

The proportion of older populations living with cancer is on the increase. Maintaining or improving their quality of life (QoL) has become an important goal in the treatment of cancer and has become an endpoint in clinical trials. Melatonin regulates a wide variety of physiological functions and is involved in the initiation of sleep and the improvement of QoL. With age, the secretion of melatonin decreases and could lead to a deterioration in QoL.

Methods

Literature searches were conducted using the PubMed database. The search terms and derivatives of “metastatic cancer”, “older patients”, “quality of life” and “melatonin” were used. Titles and abstracts were screened to identify whether studies were relevant for full-text screening.

Results

There is major concern about the symptoms older cancer patients encounter during treatment because they can impact their QoL. Melatonin supplementation presents several benefits for older patients: improvement in survival, decrease in symptoms induced by cancer and cancer treatment, and also improvements in quality of life.

Conclusion

It therefore seems appropriate to study the impact of melatonin supplementation during cytotoxic therapy on QoL among elderly patients with metastatic cancer. The use of melatonin as a therapeutic strategy seems particularly suitable for elderly patients, a population known to secrete significantly less melatonin. However, to date, no studies have been conducted in this population.

Immune-Related Adverse Events in the Older Adult with Cancer Receiving Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Therapy

Objective:

Older adults with cancer (OAC) may be at elevated risk for immune-related adverse events (irAEs) during immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy due to the normal organ function changes of aging, as well as related to a higher prevalence of comorbid conditions compared to younger patients. The importance of high-quality nursing care cannot be overstated for this population, including proactive symptom assessment, management, and coordination of care. The purpose of this paper is to describe the unique challenges faced by OAC receiving ICI drugs.

Methods:

We present both a case study and the results of a single-institution retrospective study from a large, urban US National Cancer Institute– designated comprehensive cancer center. The retrospective study examined the frequency and intensity of irAEs experienced by patients aged 75 years or older who received ICI therapy between January 2016 and December 2018 for melanoma.

Results:

We reviewed the records of 38 OAC (age range 75–92 years) with locally advanced or metastatic melanoma who received pembrolizumab, nivolumab and/or ipilimumab. Median length of therapy was 7.4 months, and median time to onset of irAEs was 81 days. Approximately half (47%) of the patients experienced Grade 1–3 irAEs, and discontinued therapy related to inability to tolerate the ICI more frequently than was reported in clinical trials (24%).

Conclusions:

OAC who receive ICI therapy frequently experience irAEs that may result in treatment interruption, discontinuation or long-lasting toxicity. Nurses are well positioned to provide support to this vulnerable population.

Safety of Outpatient Parenteral Antimicrobial Therapy in Nonagenarians

Background

Although widely accepted for adults, the safety of outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) in very old patients has not been examined.

Methods

Nonagenarians (age ≥90 years) discharged from the hospital on OPAT over a 5-year period were identified from the Cleveland Clinic OPAT Registry. Three matched controls (<90 years) were selected for each nonagenarian. Times to OPAT-related emergency department (ED) visit and OPAT-related readmission were compared across the 2 groups in multivariable subdistribution proportional hazards competing risks regression models. Incidence of adverse drug events and vascular access complications were compared using negative binomial regression.

Results

Of 126 nonagenarians and 378 controls, 7 were excluded for various reasons. Among the remaining 497 subjects, 306 (62%) were male, 311 (63%) were treated for cardiovascular or osteoarticular infections, and 363 (73%) were discharged to a residential health care facility. The mean (SD) ages of nonagenarians and controls were 92 (2) and 62 (16) years, respectively. Compared with matched controls, being a nonagenarian was not associated with increased risk of OPAT-related ED visit (hazard ratio [HR], 0.77; 95% CI, 0.33-1.80; P = .55), OPAT-related readmission (HR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.28-2.16; P = .63), adverse drug event from OPAT medications (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 1.00; 95% CI, 0.43-2.17; P = .99), or vascular access complications (IRR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.27-1.51; P = .32). Nonagenarians had a higher risk of death overall (HR, 2.64; 95% CI, 1.52-4.58; P < .001), but deaths were not from OPAT complications.

Conclusions

Compared with younger patients, OPAT in nonagenarians is not associated with higher risk of OPAT-related complications. OPAT can be provided as safely to nonagenarians as to younger patients.

Overcoming Barriers to Parkinson Disease Trial Participation: Increasing Diversity and Novel Designs for Recruitment and Retention

Parkinson disease (PD) is highly prevalent among neurodegenerative diseases, affecting a diverse patient population. Despite a general willingness of patients to participate in clinical trials, only a subset of patients enroll in them. Understanding the barriers to trial participation will help to alleviate this discrepancy and improve trial participation. Underrepresented minorities, older patients, and patients with more medical comorbidities in particular are underrepresented in research. In clinical trials, this has the effect of delaying trial completion, exacerbating disparities, and limiting our ability to generalize study results. Efforts to improve trial design and recruitment are necessary to ensure study enrollment reflects the diversity of patients with PD. At the trial design level, broadening inclusion criteria, attending to participant burden, and focusing on trial efficiency may help. At the recruitment stage, increasing awareness, with traditional outreach or digital approaches; improving engagement, particularly with community physicians; and developing targeted recruitment efforts can also help improve enrollment of underrepresented patient groups. The use of technology, for virtual visits, technology-based objective measures, and community engagement, can also reduce participant burden and increase recruitment. By designing trials to consider these barriers to trial participation, we can improve not only the access to research for all our patients but also the quality and generalizability of clinical research in PD.

Real-world data for health technology assessment for reimbursement decisions in Asia: current landscape and a way forward

There is growing interest globally in using real-world data (RWD) and real-world evidence (RWE) for health technology assessment (HTA). Optimal collection, analysis, and use of RWD/RWE to inform HTA requires a conceptual framework to standardize processes and ensure consistency. However, such framework is currently lacking in Asia, a region that is likely to benefit from RWD/RWE for at least two reasons. First, there is often limited Asian representation in clinical trials unless specifically conducted in Asian populations, and RWD may help to fill the evidence gap. Second, in a few Asian health systems, reimbursement decisions are not made at market entry; thus, allowing RWD/RWE to be collected to give more certainty about the effectiveness of technologies in the local setting and inform their appropriate use. Furthermore, an alignment of RWD/RWE policies across Asia would equip decision makers with context-relevant evidence, and improve timely patient access to new technologies. Using data collected from eleven health systems in Asia, this paper provides a review of the current landscape of RWD/RWE in Asia to inform HTA and explores a way forward to align policies within the region. This paper concludes with a proposal to establish an international collaboration among academics and HTA agencies in the region: the REAL World Data In ASia for HEalth Technology Assessment in Reimbursement (REALISE) working group, which seeks to develop a non-binding guidance document on the use of RWD/RWE to inform HTA for decision making in Asia.

Exploring the Engagement of Racial and Ethnic Minorities in HIV Treatment and Vaccine Clinical Trials: A Scoping Review of Literature and Implications for Future Research

HIV disproportionately impacts US racial and ethnic minorities but they participate in treatment and vaccine clinical trials at a lower rate than whites. To summarize barriers and facilitators to this participation we conducted a scoping review of the literature guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Studies published from January 2007 and September 2019 were reviewed. Thirty-one articles were identified from an initial pool of 325 records using three coders. All records were then assessed for barriers and facilitators and summarized. Results indicate that while racial and ethnic minority participation in these trials has increased over the past 10 years, rates still do not proportionately reflect their burden of HIV infection. While many of the barriers mirror those found in other disease clinical trials (e.g., cancer), HIV stigma is a unique and important barrier to participating in HIV clinical trials. Recommendations to improve recruitment and retention of racial and ethnic minorities include training health care providers on the importance of recruiting diverse participants, creating interdisciplinary research teams that better represent who is being recruited, and providing culturally competent trial designs. Despite the knowledge of how to better recruit racial and ethnic minorities, few interventions have been documented using these strategies. Based on the findings of this review, we recommend that future clinical trials engage community stakeholders in all stages of the research process through community-based participatory research approaches and promote culturally and linguistically appropriate recruitment and retention strategies for marginalized populations overly impacted by HIV.

A Randomized Controlled Trial of Behavioral Nudges to Improve Enrollment in Critical Care Trials

Rationale: Low and slow patient enrollment remains a barrier to critical care randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Behavioral economic insights suggest that nudges may address some enrollment challenges.Objectives: To evaluate the efficacy of a novel preconsent survey consisting of nudges on critical care RCT enrollment.Methods: We conducted an RCT in 10 intensive care units (ICUs) among surrogate decision-makers (SDMs). The novel multicomponent behavioral nudge survey was administered immediately before soliciting SDMs' informed consent for their patients' participation in a sham trial of two mechanical ventilation weaning approaches in acute respiratory failure. The primary outcome was the enrollment rate for the sham trial. Secondary outcomes included undue and unjust inducements. We also explored SDM and patient predictors of enrollment using multivariate regression.Results: Among 182 SDMs, 93 were randomized to receive the intervention survey and 89 to receive standard informed consent. There was no statistically significant difference in enrollment rates between the intervention (29%) and standard consent (34%) groups (percentage difference, 5%; 95% confidence interval [CI], -9% to 18%; P = 0.50). There was no evidence of undue or unjust inducement. White SDMs were more likely to enroll the patient compared with non-white SDMs (odds ratio, 3.7; 95% CI, 1.1 to 12.2; P = 0.03). SDMs who perceived a higher risk of participation were less likely to enroll the patient (odds ratio, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.46 to 0.71; P < 0.001).Conclusions: A preconsent behavioral nudge survey among SDMs of patients with acute respiratory failure in the ICU did not increase enrollment rates for a sham RCT compared with standard informed consent procedures.Clinical trial registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03284359).

Age-treatment subgroup analyses in Cochrane intervention reviews: a meta-epidemiological study

BACKGROUND

There is growing interest in evaluating differences in healthcare interventions across routinely collected demographic characteristics. However, individual subgroup analyses in randomized controlled trials are often not prespecified, adjusted for multiple testing, or conducted using the appropriate statistical test for interaction, and therefore frequently lack credibility. Meta-analyses can be used to examine the validity of potential subgroup differences by collating evidence across trials. Here, we characterize the conduct and clinical translation of age-treatment subgroup analyses in Cochrane reviews.

METHODS

For a random sample of 928 Cochrane intervention reviews of randomized trials, we determined how often subgroup analyses of age are reported, how often these analyses have a P < 0.05 from formal interaction testing, how frequently subgroup differences first observed in an individual trial are later corroborated by other trials in the same meta-analysis, and how often statistically significant results are included in commonly used clinical management resources (BMJ Best Practice, UpToDate, Cochrane Clinical Answers, Google Scholar, and Google search).

RESULTS

Among 928 Cochrane intervention reviews, 189 (20.4%) included plans to conduct age-treatment subgroup analyses. The vast majority (162 of 189, 85.7%) of the planned analyses were not conducted, commonly because of insufficient trial data. There were 22 reviews that conducted their planned age-treatment subgroup analyses, and another 3 reviews appeared to perform unplanned age-treatment subgroup analyses. These 25 (25 of 928, 2.7%) reviews conducted a total of 97 age-treatment subgroup analyses, of which 65 analyses (in 20 reviews) had non-overlapping subgroup levels. Among the 65 age-treatment subgroup analyses, 14 (21.5%) did not report any formal interaction testing. Seven (10.8%) reported P < 0.05 from formal age-treatment interaction testing; however, none of these seven analyses were in reviews that discussed the potential biological rationale or clinical significance of the subgroup findings or had results that were included in common clinical practice resources.

CONCLUSION

Age-treatment subgroup analyses in Cochrane intervention reviews were frequently planned but rarely conducted, and implications of detected interactions were not discussed in the reviews or mentioned in common clinical resources. When subgroup analyses are performed, authors should report the findings, compare the results to previous studies, and outline any potential impact on clinical care.

Can machine learning improve patient selection for cardiac resynchronization therapy?

RATIONALE

Multiple clinical trials support the effectiveness of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT); however, optimal patient selection remains challenging due to substantial treatment heterogeneity among patients who meet the clinical practice guidelines.

OBJECTIVE

To apply machine learning to create an algorithm that predicts CRT outcome using electronic health record (EHR) data avaible before the procedure.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We applied machine learning and natural language processing to the EHR of 990 patients who received CRT at two academic hospitals between 2004-2015. The primary outcome was reduced CRT benefit, defined as <0% improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) 6-18 months post-procedure or death by 18 months. Data regarding demographics, laboratory values, medications, clinical characteristics, and past health services utilization were extracted from the EHR available before the CRT procedure. Bigrams (i.e., two-word sequences) were also extracted from the clinical notes using natural language processing. Patients accrued on average 75 clinical notes (SD, 29) before the procedure including data not captured anywhere else in the EHR. A machine learning model was built using 80% of the patient sample (training and validation dataset), and tested on a held-out 20% patient sample (test dataset). Among 990 patients receiving CRT the mean age was 71.6 (SD, 11.8), 78.1% were male, 87.2% non-Hispanic white, and the mean baseline LVEF was 24.8% (SD, 7.69). Out of 990 patients, 403 (40.7%) were identified as having a reduced benefit from the CRT device (<0% LVEF improvement in 25.2%, death by 18 months in 15.6%). The final model identified 26% of these patients at a positive predictive value of 79% (model performance: Fβ (β = 0.1): 77%; recall 0.26; precision 0.79; accuracy 0.65).

CONCLUSIONS

A machine learning model that leveraged readily available EHR data and clinical notes identified a subset of CRT patients who may not benefit from CRT before the procedure.

Darunavir/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide in treatment-experienced, virologically suppressed patients with HIV-1: subgroup analyses of the phase 3 EMERALD study

Background

Darunavir/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (D/C/F/TAF) 800/150/200/10 mg is a once-daily, single-tablet regimen for treatment of HIV-1 infection. The efficacy/safety of switching to D/C/F/TAF versus continuing boosted protease inhibitor (bPI) + emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (control) were demonstrated in a phase 3, randomized study (EMERALD) of treatment-experienced, virologically suppressed adults through week 48. The objective of this analysis was to evaluate EMERALD outcomes across subgroups of patients based on demographic characteristics, prior treatment experience, and baseline antiretroviral regimen.

Methods

EMERALD patients were virologically suppressed (viral load [VL] < 50 copies/mL for ≥ 2 months at screening). Prior non-darunavir virologic failure (VF) was allowed. Primary endpoint was proportion of patients with virologic rebound (confirmed VL ≥ 50 copies/mL) cumulative through week 48. Virologic response was VL < 50 copies/mL (FDA snapshot). Safety was assessed by adverse events, renal proteinuria markers, and bone mineral density. Outcomes were examined for prespecified subgroups by age (≤/> 50 years), gender, race (black/non-black), prior number of antiretrovirals used (4/5/6/7/> 7), prior VF (0/≥ 1), baseline bPI (darunavir/atazanavir or lopinavir), and baseline boosting agent (ritonavir/cobicistat).

Results

Among 1141 patients in the D/C/F/TAF (n = 763) and control (n = 378) arms, virologic rebound rates (2.5% and 2.1%, respectively) were similar, and this was consistent across all subgroups. Virologic response rates ranged from 91 to 97% (D/C/F/TAF) and 89 to 99% (control) across all subgroups, with differences between treatment arms of 0 and 6%. Adverse event rates were low in both arms and across subgroups. Improvements in renal and bone parameters were observed with D/C/F/TAF across demographic subgroups.

Conclusions

For treatment-experienced, virologically suppressed patients, switching to D/C/F/TAF was highly effective and safe, regardless of demographic characteristics, prior treatment experience, or pre-switch bPI.

Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02269917. Registered 21 October 2014. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02269917

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12981-019-0235-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Lipid management in patients with chronic kidney disease

An increased risk of cardiovascular disease, independent of conventional risk factors, is present even at minor levels of renal impairment and is highest in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) requiring dialysis. Renal dysfunction changes the level, composition and quality of blood lipids in favour of a more atherogenic profile. Patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) or ESRD have a characteristic lipid pattern of hypertriglyceridaemia and low HDL cholesterol levels but normal LDL cholesterol levels. In the general population, a clear relationship exists between LDL cholesterol and major atherosclerotic events. However, in patients with ESRD, LDL cholesterol shows a negative association with these outcomes at below average LDL cholesterol levels and a flat or weakly positive association with mortality at higher LDL cholesterol levels. Overall, the available data suggest that lowering of LDL cholesterol is beneficial for prevention of major atherosclerotic events in patients with CKD and in kidney transplant recipients but is not beneficial in patients requiring dialysis. The 2013 Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Clinical Practice Guideline for Lipid Management in CKD provides simple recommendations for the management of dyslipidaemia in patients with CKD and ESRD. However, emerging data and novel lipid-lowering therapies warrant some reappraisal of these recommendations.

Engaging patients throughout the health system: A landscape analysis of cold-call policies and recommendations for future policy change

Healthcare institutions may often prohibit “cold-calling” or direct contact with a potential research participant when the person initiating contact is unknown to the patient. This policy aims to maintain patient privacy, but may have unintended consequences as a result of physician gatekeeping. In this review, we discuss recruitment policies at the top academic institutions. We propose an ethical framework for evaluating cold-call policies based on three principles of research ethics. In order to maximize engagement of potential research participants, while maintaining patient privacy and autonomy, we then propose several alternative solutions to restrictive cold-call policies, including opt-in or opt-out platforms, a team-based approach, electronic solutions, and best practices for recruitment. As healthcare has evolved with more collaborative, patient-centered, data-driven care, the engagement of potential research participants should similarly evolve.

Challenges recruiting to a proof-of-concept pharmaceutical trial for a rare disease: the trigeminal neuralgia experience

Background

This study aimed to describe recruitment challenges encountered during a phase IIa study of vixotrigine, a state and use-dependent Nav1.7 channel blocker, in individuals with trigeminal neuralgia.

Methods

This was an international, multicenter, placebo-controlled, randomized withdrawal study that included a 7-day run-in period, a 21-day open-label phase, and a 28-day double-blind phase in which patients (planned n = 30) were randomized to vixotrigine or placebo. Before recruitment, all antiepileptic drugs had to be stopped, except for gabapentin or pregabalin. After the trial, patients returned to their original medications. Patient recruitment was expanded beyond the original five planned (core) centers in order to meet target enrollment (total recruiting sites N = 25). Core sites contributed data related to patient identification for study participation (prescreening data). Data related to screening failures and study withdrawal were also analyzed using descriptive statistics.

Results

Approximately half (322/636; 50.6%) of the patients who were prescreened at core sites were considered eligible for the study and 56/322 (17.4%) were screened. Of those considered eligible, 26/322 (8.1%) enrolled in the study and 6/322 (1.9%) completed the study. In total, 125 patients were screened across all study sites and 67/125 (53.6%) were enrolled. At prescreening, reasons for noneligibility varied by site and were most commonly diagnosis change (78/314; 24.8%), age > 80 years (75/314; 23.9%), language/distance/mobility (61/314; 19.4%), and noncardiac medical problems (53/314; 16.9%). At screening, frequently cited reasons for noneligibility included failure based on electrocardiogram, insufficient pain, and diagnosis change.

Conclusions

Factors contributing to recruitment challenges encountered in this study included diagnosis changes, anxiety over treatment changes, and issues relating to distance, language, and mobility. Wherever possible, future studies should be designed to address these challenges.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01540630.

EudraCT, 2010-023963-16. 07 Aug 2015.

Diversity in Medical Device Clinical Trials: Do We Know What Works for Which Patients?

Policy Points: A 1993 law required the National Institutes of Health to include women and racial and ethnic minorities in relevant research studies. Most federal health agencies adopted the same policy, but the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) did not. A 2012 law encouraged the FDA to ensure that new medical products be analyzed for safety and effectiveness for key demographic patient groups. Our study of high-risk medical devices reviewed by the FDA in 2014-2017 found that due to lack of patient diversity and publicly available data, clinicians and patients often cannot determine which devices are safe and effective for specific demographic groups.

CONTEXT

Demographic differences can influence the safety and effectiveness of medical devices; however, clinical trials of devices for adults have historically underrepresented women, people of color, and patients over age 65. The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Safety and Innovation Act became law in 2012, encouraging greater diversity and subgroup analyses. In 2013, the FDA reported that there was diversity in clinical trials considered "pivotal" for approval decisions and that subgroup analyses were conducted for most applications for the highest-risk medical devices. However, the FDA's report did not specify whether analyses included sufficient numbers to be meaningful, whether analyses were conducted for most major subgroups, or whether analyses included safety, effectiveness, or accuracy.

METHODS

We examined publicly available documents for all 22 medical devices that the FDA designated "highest risk" or "novel," were reviewed through the premarket approval pathway, and were scrutinized at FDA public meetings from 2014 to 2017. We evaluated patient demographics and subgroup analyses for all pivotal trials.

FINDINGS

Only 3 (14%) of the devices provided subgroup analyses for both effectiveness and safety or both sensitivity and selectivity for gender, race, and age. However, 55% of the devices reported both of those subgroup analyses for at least 1 of the 3 subgroups. Whether analyses were reported or not, the number of patients in most subgroups was too small to draw meaningful conclusions. Subgroup analyses were more likely to be reported to the FDA's Advisory Committees than in the FDA's public reviews or labeling.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite a law encouraging more diversity and subgroup analyses in pivotal trials used as the basis for FDA approval, the results of our study indicate relatively few subgroup analyses are publicly available for the highest-risk and novel medical devices. The lack of subgroup analyses makes it impossible to inform patients or physicians as to whether many newly approved medical devices are safe and effective for specific demographic subgroups defined by gender, race, and age.

Demographic Composition of Select Oncologic New Molecular Entities Approved by the FDA Between 2008 and 2017

Race, ethnicity, sex, and age are demographic factors that can influence drug exposure and/or response, and can consequently affect treatment outcome. We evaluated demographic subgroup enrollment patterns in new therapeutic products approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the treatment of select cancers-breast, colorectal, lung, and prostate-that have comparative differences in morbidity and/or mortality among some demographic subgroups. In submissions of products approved between 2008 and 2013, participants (n = 22,481) were white (80%), from outside the United States (74%), between 17 and 64 years old (59%), and men (56% and 53%, including and excluding sex-specific indications, respectively). In pivotal trials of products approved between2014 and 2017, participants (n = 3,612) were white (71%), between 17 and 64 years old (61%), and men (48% and 63%, including and excluding sex-specific indications, respectively). The US-relevant minority populations were under-represented. A broader representation of patient subgroups in clinical trials may contribute to better understanding of exposure and/or response variability, and consequently help personalize drug therapy.

Speed of Adoption of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors of Programmed Cell Death 1 Protein and Comparison of Patient Ages in Clinical Practice vs Pivotal Clinical Trials

Importance

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is increasing its pace of approvals for novel cancer therapeutics, including for immune checkpoint inhibitors of programmed cell death 1 protein (anti-PD-1 agents). However, little is known about how quickly anti-PD-1 agents agents reach eligible patients in practice or whether such patients differ from those studied in clinical trials that lead to FDA approval (pivotal clinical trials).

Objectives

To assess the speed with which anti-PD-1 agents agents reached eligible patients in practice and to compare the ages of patients treated in clinical practice with the ages of those treated in pivotal clinical trials.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective cohort study, performed from January 1, 2011, through August 31, 2016, included patients from the Flatiron Health Network who were eligible for anti-PD-1 agents treatment of selected cancer types, which included melanoma, non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), and renal cell carcinoma (RCC).

Main Outcomes and Measures

Cumulative proportions of eligible patients receiving anti-PD-1 agents treatment and their age distributions.

Results

The study identified 3089 patients who were eligible for anti-PD-1 agents treatment (median age, 66 [interquartile range, 56-75] years for patients with melanoma, 66 [interquartile range, 58-72] years for patients with RCC, and 67 [interquartile range, 59-74] years for patients with NSCLC; 1742 male [56.4%] and 1347 [43.6%] female; 2066 [66.9%] white). Of these patients, 2123 (68.7%) received anti-PD-1 agents treatment, including 439 eligible patients with melanoma (79.1%), 1417 eligible patients with NSCLC (65.6%), and 267 eligible patients with RCC (71.2%). Within 4 months after FDA approval, greater than 60% of eligible patients in each cohort had received anti-PD-1 agents treatment. Overall, similar proportions of older and younger patients received anti-PD-1 agents treatment during the first 9 months after FDA approval. However, there were significant differences in age between clinical trial participants and patients receiving anti-PD-1 agents treatment in clinical practice, with more patients being older than 65 years in clinical practice (range, 327 of 1365 [60.6%] to 46 of 72 [63.9%]) than in pivotal clinical trials (range, 38 of 120 [31.7%] to 223 of 544 [41.0%]; all P < .001).

Conclusions and Relevance

Anti-PD-1 agents rapidly reached patients in clinical practice, and patients treated in clinical practice differed significantly from patients treated in pivotal clinical trials. Future actions are needed to ensure that rapid adoption occurs on the basis of representative trial evidence.

The US Food and Drug Administration’s expedited approval programs: Evidentiary standards, regulatory trade-offs, and potential improvements

The US Food and Drug Administration has several regulatory programs and pathways to expedite the development and approval of therapeutic agents aimed at treating serious or life-debilitating conditions. A common feature of these programs is the regulatory flexibility, which allows for a customized approval approach that enables market authorization on the basis of less rigorous evidence, in exchange for requiring postmarket evidence generation. An increasing share of therapeutic agents approved by the Food and Drug Administration in recent years are associated with expedited programs. In this article, we provide an overview of the evidentiary standards required by the Food and Drug Administration’s expedited development and review programs, summarize the findings of the recent academic literature demonstrating some of the limitations of these programs, and outline potential opportunities to address these limitations. Recent evidence suggests that therapeutic agents in the Food and Drug Administration’s expedited programs are approved on the basis of fewer and smaller studies that may lack comparator groups and random allocation, and rather than focusing on clinical outcomes for study endpoints, rely instead on surrogate markers of disease. Once on the market, agents receiving expedited approvals are often quickly incorporated into clinical practice, and evidence generated in the postmarket period may not necessarily address the evidentiary limitations at the time of market entry. Furthermore, not all pathways require additional postmarket studies. Evidence suggests that drugs in expedited approval programs are associated with a greater likelihood that the Food and Drug Administration will take a safety action following market entry. There are several opportunities to improve the timeliness, information value, and validity of the pre- and postmarket studies of therapeutic agents receiving expedited approvals. When use of nonrandomized and uncontrolled studies cannot be avoided prior to market entry, randomized trials should be mandatory in the postmarket period, unless there are strong justifications for not carrying out such studies. In the premarket period, validity of the surrogate markers can be improved by more rigorously evaluating their correlation with patient-relevant clinical outcomes. Opportunities to reduce the duration, complexity, and cost of postmarket randomized trials should not compromise their validity and instead incorporate pragmatic “real-world” design elements. Despite recent enthusiasm for widely using real-world evidence, adaptive designs, and pragmatic trials in the regulatory setting, caution is warranted until large-scale empirical evaluations demonstrate their validity compared to more traditional trial designs.

The association of C-reactive protein with subclinical cardiovascular disease in HIV-infected and HIV-uninfected women

OBJECTIVE

HIV is a cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factor. However, CVD risk is often underestimated in HIV-infected women. C-reactive protein (CRP) may improve CVD prediction in this population. We examined the association of baseline plasma CRP with subclinical CVD in women with and without HIV.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

METHODS

A total of 572 HIV-infected and 211 HIV-uninfected women enrolled in the Women's Interagency HIV Study underwent serial high-resolution B-mode carotid artery ultrasonography between 2004 and 2013 to assess carotid intima-media thickness (CIMT) and focal carotid artery plaques. We used multivariable linear and logistic regression models to assess the association of baseline high (≥3 mg/l) high-sensitivity (hs) CRP with baseline CIMT and focal plaques, and used multivariable linear and Poisson regression models for the associations of high hsCRP with CIMT change and focal plaque progression. We stratified our analyses by HIV status.

RESULTS

Median (interquartile range) hsCRP was 2.2 mg/l (0.8-5.3) in HIV-infected, and 3.2 mg/l (0.9-7.7) in HIV-uninfected, women (P = 0.005). There was no statistically significant association of hsCRP with baseline CIMT [adjusted mean difference -3.5 μm (95% confidence interval:-19.0 to 12.1)] or focal plaques [adjusted odds ratio: 1.31 (0.67-2.67)], and no statistically significant association of hsCRP with CIMT change [adjusted mean difference 11.4 μm (-2.3 to 25.1)]. However, hsCRP at least 3 mg/l was positively associated with focal plaque progression in HIV-uninfected [adjusted rate ratio: 5.97 (1.46-24.43)], but not in HIV-infected [adjusted rate ratio: 0.81 (0.47-1.42)] women (P = 0.042 for interaction).

CONCLUSION

In our cohort of women with similar CVD risk factors, higher baseline hsCRP is positively associated with carotid plaque progression in HIV-uninfected, but not HIV-infected, women, suggesting that subclinical CVD pathogenesis may be different HIV-infected women.

Managing Polypharmacy in the 15-Minute Office Visit

Polypharmacy is an underappreciated factor in undesirable patient outcomes. In older adults, polypharmacy is considered a syndrome of harm and presents a challenge to primary care providers. The United States has one of the highest medication use rates per capita in the world. With the aging population, and polypharmacy a significant part of the lives of older adults, management of polypharmacy poses both a growing challenge and an opportunity for all health care providers. This article provides an overview of skills to improve medication use management in older adults living with polypharmacy.

An Observational Study of the Association of Video- Versus Text-Based Informed Consent With Multicenter Trial Enrollment: Lessons From the PALM Study (Patient and Provider Assessment of Lipid Management)

BACKGROUND

Patient participation in clinical research is low, in part because of the length and complexity of the informed consent process. Video informed consent may enhance the appeal of research and help break down barriers to participation.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The PALM study (Patient and Provider Assessment of Lipid Management) enrolled 7904 patients at cardiology, endocrinology, and primary care clinics across the United States to evaluate cholesterol management practices. Of 153 participating clinics, 67 (43.8%) secured institutional review board approval to use a tablet-based video informed consent tool that patients could select to navigate through the informed consent process instead of traditional text-based informed consent. At sites without institutional review board approval of video consent, all patients read a text-based informed consent document. Site activation times and enrollment volumes, as well as characteristics of enrolled patients, were compared between sites with and without video consent capability. Sites with video consent capability more often used a central institutional review board (89.6% versus 73.3%), were more often rural (16.7% versus 3.8%), and tended to have fewer providers. Compared with sites without video consent capability, sites with video consent capability had shorter times from site approach to first patient enrollment (median 178 versus 207 days; P=0.02). Sites with video consent capability enrolled similar numbers of patients as sites without video consent capability (P=0.48) but enrolled a greater proportion of patients who were ≥75 years old (27.5% versus 23.6%; P<0.001) and nonwhite (17.7% versus 14.2%; P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In this observational study of recruitment in a multicenter registry, sites approved for video consent use enrolled the same number of patients as sites with only traditional text-based informed consent but had faster speed to first patient enrolled and more often enrolled older and nonwhite patients. Future randomized trials are needed to assess the impact of video consent on enrollment mechanics and demographics.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT02341664.

Comparison of treatment effect sizes from pivotal and postapproval trials of novel therapeutics approved by the FDA based on surrogate markers of disease: a meta-epidemiological study

BACKGROUND

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) often approves new drugs based on trials that use surrogate markers for endpoints, which involve certain trade-offs and may risk making erroneous inferences about the medical product's actual clinical effect. This study aims to compare the treatment effects among pivotal trials supporting FDA approval of novel therapeutics based on surrogate markers of disease with those observed among postapproval trials for the same indication.

METHODS

We searched Drugs@FDA and PubMed to identify published randomized superiority design pivotal trials for all novel drugs initially approved by the FDA between 2005 and 2012 based on surrogate markers as primary endpoints and published postapproval trials using the same surrogate markers or patient-relevant outcomes as endpoints. Summary ratio of odds ratios (RORs) and difference between standardized mean differences (dSMDs) were used to quantify the average difference in treatment effects between pivotal and matched postapproval trials.

RESULTS

Between 2005 and 2012, the FDA approved 88 novel drugs for 90 indications based on one or multiple pivotal trials using surrogate markers of disease. Of these, 27 novel drugs for 27 indications were approved based on pivotal trials using surrogate markers as primary endpoints that could be matched to at least one postapproval trial, for a total of 43 matches. For nine (75.0%) of the 12 matches using the same non-continuous surrogate markers as trial endpoints, pivotal trials had larger treatment effects than postapproval trials. On average, treatment effects were 50% higher (more beneficial) in the pivotal than the postapproval trials (ROR 1.5; 95% confidence interval CI 1.01-2.23). For 17 (54.8%) of the 31 matches using the same continuous surrogate markers as trial endpoints, pivotal trials had larger treatment effects than the postapproval trials. On average, there was no difference in treatment effects between pivotal and postapproval trials (dSMDs 0.01; 95% CI -0.15-0.16).

CONCLUSIONS

Many postapproval drug trials are not directly comparable to previously published pivotal trials, particularly with respect to endpoint selection. Although treatment effects from pivotal trials supporting FDA approval of novel therapeutics based on non-continuous surrogate markers of disease are often larger than those observed among postapproval trials using surrogate markers as trial endpoints, there is no evidence of difference between pivotal and postapproval trials using continuous surrogate markers.

Representation of black patients in randomized clinical trials of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction

BACKGROUND

Black individuals have a disproportionately higher burden of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) relative to other racial and ethnic populations. We conducted a systematic review to determine the representation, enrollment trends, and outcomes of black patients in historic and contemporary randomized clinical trials (RCTs) for HFrEF.

METHODS

We searched PubMed and Embase for RCTs of patients with chronic HFrEF that evaluated therapies that significantly improved clinical outcomes. We extracted trial characteristics and compared them by trial type. Linear regression was used to assess trends in enrollment among HFrEF RCTs over time.

RESULTS

A total of 25 RCTs, 19 for pharmacotherapies and 6 (n=9,501) for implantable cardioverter defibrillators, were included in this analysis. Among these studies, there were 78,816 patients, 4,640 black (5.9%), and the median black participation per trial was 162 patients. Black race was reported in the manuscript of 14 (56.0%) trials, and outcomes by race were available for 12 (48.0%) trials. Implantable cardiac defibrillator trials enrolled a greater percentage of black patients than pharmacotherapy trials (7.1% vs 5.7%). Overall, patient enrollment among the 25 RCTs increased over time (P = .075); however, the percentage of black patients has decreased (P = .001). Outcomes varied significantly between black and white patients in 6 studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Black patients are modestly represented among pivotal RCTs of individuals with HFrEF for both pharmacotherapies and implantable cardioverter defibrillators. The current trend for decreasing black representation in trials of HF therapeutics is concerning and must improve to ensure the generalizability for this vulnerable population.