Healthy volunteers in US phase I clinical trials: Sociodemographic characteristics and participation over time

Diversity and Representation Among United States Participants in Amgen Clinical Trials

OBJECTIVE

Describe the demographic profile of US participants in Amgen clinical trials over a 10-year period and variations across therapeutic areas, indications, and geographies.

METHODS

Cross-sectional retrospective study including participants enrolled (2005-2020) in phase 1-3 trials completed between January 1, 2012 and June 30, 2021.

RESULTS

Among 31,619 participants enrolled across 258 trials, one-fifth represented racial minority populations (Asian, 3%; Black or African American, 17%; American Indian or Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, multiracial, each < 1%); fewer than one-fifth (16%) represented an ethnic minority population (Hispanic or Latino). Compared with census data, representation of racial and ethnic groups varied across US states. Across most therapeutic areas (bone, cardiovascular, hematology/oncology, inflammation, metabolic disorders, neuroscience) except nephrology, participants were predominantly White (72-81%). A similar proportion of males and females were enrolled between 2005 and 2016; male representation was disproportionately higher than female between 2016 and 2020. Across most medical indications, the majority of participants were 18-65 years of age.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

While the clinical research community is striving to achieve diversity and proportional representation across clinical trials, certain populations remain underrepresented. Our data provide a baseline assessment of the diversity and representation of US participants in Amgen-sponsored clinical trials and add to a growing body of evidence on the importance of diversity in clinical research. These data provide a foundation for strategies aimed at supporting more equitable and representative research, and a baseline from which to assess the impact of future strategies to advance health equity.

Demographic Diversity of Clinical Trials for Therapeutic Drug Products: A Systematic Review of Recently Published Articles, 2017-2022

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) encourages the use of enrollment practices that will lead to clinical trials that reflect the population most likely to use the therapeutic product (drug or biologic), if approved. In doing so, the benefit-risk profile of the product may be assessed more completely and offer patients and their health care providers a better understanding of the drug profile and greater confidence in clinical trial results. The objective of this systematic review was to assess recent literature on the demographic diversity of clinical trial participants, describe the methods used in defining clinical trial diversity, and address knowledge gaps to enhance clinical trial diversity. Our literature search initially yielded 246 articles. After applying our eligibility criteria, we conducted a full-text review and analyzed the contents of the 28 remaining articles in our systematic review. Eleven (39%) of the 28 articles used a reference standard to compare the participation of populations in clinical trials to assess diversity. The majority of the 28 articles reported on adult participants; only 5 included pediatric populations. Most articles found that women and minority populations were underrepresented in clinical trials. Some articles proposed solutions to improve clinical trial diversity; however, several did not comment on clinical trial diversity. Despite a growing emphasis on demographic diversity in research, certain populations continue to be underrepresented in clinical trials. There is a need to standardize the definition of diversity in clinical trials. Future research into effective enrollment approaches and appropriate reference standards could improve demographic diversity.

Sociodemographic characteristics of healthy volunteers along with their experience, attitude and concerns of clinical trials in Wuhan, China

China has became the world's second largest pharmaceutical market, and the number of her registered clinical trials exceeded 3000 in 2021. Although thousands of healthy volunteers are participating in a large number of clinical trials in this country, there is no report about the characteristics, recognition, attitude of Chinese healthy volunteers and their concerns of clinical trials. A questionnaire survey was designed and given to 324 healthy volunteers participating in clinical trials in Wuhan, China. Four important findings emerged from our data. First, young, single and less educated men constituted the majority of Chinese healthy volunteers. Second, differences between the male and female healthy volunteers were observed. Female healthy volunteers are supposed to face more challenges and pressure in life, be more cautious about the clinical trials and more concerned about their health and feelings than the male. Third, no sociodemographic characteristic was associated with poorly understanding of the protocol research content, which was subjectively evaluated. Fourth, more support from society/family and more positive media reports about the participation of healthy volunteers in clinical trials are badly needed. These findings would help us to get a better understanding of Chinese healthy volunteers as a group for protecting them and promoting drug development.

Mutual Emotional Labor as Method: Building Connections of Care in Qualitative Research

Emotional labor may be vital to the success of qualitative research studies, particularly longitudinal studies that depend on the maintenance of research relationships over time. Rather than being limited to the comportment of researchers toward their participants, however, we find that participants also actively engage in practices of emotional labor to manage researchers and guide research interactions. We document elements of such "mutual emotional labor" in the establishment of rapport, in crafting experiences of personalized therapeutic benefit from participating in interviews, and in efforts to navigate closure at the conclusion of research projects. We argue that by recognizing forms of reciprocal emotion management, researchers may be better equipped to engage in ethical research practices that serve not only knowledge production but also human connection and care.

"Death and Taxes": Why Financial Compensation for Research Participants is an Economic and Legal Risk

In the US, research payments are technically taxable income. This article argues that tax liability is a form of possible economic and legal risk of paid research participation. Findings are presented from empirical research on Phase I healthy volunteer trials. The article concludes by discussing the implications of these findings for the informed consent process, as well as for broader ethical issues in whether and how payments for research participation should be regulated.

Factors that impact on recruitment to vaccine trials in the context of a pandemic or epidemic: a qualitative evidence synthesis

BACKGROUND

The World Health Organization declared the COVID-19 pandemic on 11 March 2020. Vaccine development and deployment were swiftly prioritised as a method to manage and control disease spread. The development of an effective vaccine relies on people's participation in randomised trials. Recruitment to vaccine trials is particularly challenging as it involves healthy volunteers who may have concerns around the potential risks and benefits associated with rapidly developed vaccines.

OBJECTIVES

To explore the factors that influence a person's decision to participate in a vaccine trial in the context of a pandemic or epidemic.

SEARCH METHODS

We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was June 2021.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included qualitative studies and mixed-methods studies with an identifiable qualitative component. We included studies that explored the perspectives of adults aged 18 years or older who were invited to take part in vaccine trials in the context of a pandemic or epidemic.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We assessed the title, abstracts and full texts identified by the search. We used a sampling frame to identify data-rich studies that represented a range of diseases and geographical spread. We used QSR NVivo to manage extracted data. We assessed methodological limitations using an adapted version of the Critical Skills Appraisal Programme (CASP) tool for qualitative studies. We used the 'best-fit framework approach' to analyse and synthesise the evidence from our included studies. We then used the Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research (GRADE-CERQual) assessment to assess our confidence in each finding and develop implications for practice.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 34 studies in our review. Most studies related to HIV vaccine trials. The other studies related to Ebola virus, tuberculosis, Zika virus and COVID-19. We developed 20 key findings, under three broad themes (with seven subthemes), that described the factors that people consider when deciding whether to take part in a vaccine trial for a pandemic or epidemic disease. Our GRADE-CERQual confidence was high in nine of the key findings, moderate in 10 key findings and low in one key finding. The main reason for downgrading review findings were concerns regarding the relevance and adequacy of the underlying data. As a result of the over-representation of HIV studies, our GRADE-CERQual assessment of some findings was downgraded in terms of relevance because the views described may not reflect those of people regarding vaccine trials for other pandemic or epidemic diseases. Adequacy relates to the degree of richness and quantity of data supporting a review finding. Moderate concerns about adequacy resulted in a downgrading of some review findings. Some factors were considered to be under the control of the trial team. These included how trial information was communicated and the inclusion of people in the community to help with trial information dissemination. Aspects of trial design were also considered under control of the trial team and included convenience of participation, provision of financial incentives and access to additional support services for those taking part in the trial. Other factors influencing people's decision to take part could be personal, from family, friends or wider society. From a personal perceptive, people had concerns about vaccine side effects, vaccine efficacy and possible impact on their daily lives (carer responsibilities, work, etc.). People were also influenced by their families, and the impact participation may have on relationships. The fear of stigma from society influenced the decision to take part. Also, from a societal perspective, the level of trust in governments' involvement in research and trial may influence a person's decision. Finally, the perceived rewards, both personal and societal, were influencing factors on the decision to participate. Personal rewards included access to a vaccine, improved health and improved disease knowledge, and a return to normality in the context of a pandemic or epidemic. Potential societal rewards included helping the community and contributing to science, often motivated by the memories of family and friends who had died from the disease.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review identifies many of the factors that influence a person's decision to take part in a vaccine trial, and these reflect findings from reviews that examine trials more broadly. However, we also recognise some factors that become more important in connection with a vaccine trial in the context of a pandemic or epidemic. These factors include the potential stigma of taking part, the possible adverse effects of a vaccine, the added motivation for helping society, the role of community leaders in trial dissemination, and the level of trust placed in governments and companies developing vaccines. These specific influences need to be considered by trial teams when designing, and communicating about, vaccine trials in the context of a pandemic or epidemic.

Demographic diversity of US-based participants in GSK-sponsored interventional clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Demographic diversity among clinical trials is required for representing the real-world populations intended for treatment and disease prevention. Moreover, genetic and environmental differences between ethnic and racial groups necessitate appropriately powered trials for relevant subgroups. We investigate the racial and ethnic demographic diversity of US-based participants in GSK-sponsored interventional trials. We also assess the evaluation of demographic diversity against US Census and epidemiologic data.

METHODS

GSK-sponsored interventional phase I-IV clinical trials conducted from 2002 to 2019 across three areas were analyzed: pharmaceutical (includes therapeutic medicines except for vaccines and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)), vaccine (includes prophylactic and therapeutic vaccines), and ViiV (includes HIV therapies). A total of 1005 global trials encompassing 460,707 global participants were identified, of which 495 had US-based sites with a total of 108,261 (23.5% of global) US participants (pharmaceutical, n = 357 trials; vaccine, n = 45 trials; and ViiV, n = 93 trials). We evaluated how GSK US-based trial recruitment compares with US Census (in line with previously published studies from other groups) and with epidemiologic data.

RESULTS

GSK participant data for race and ethnicity combined across areas were generally similar to US Census levels (e.g. GSK versus census: White, 76.5% versus 76.3%; Black or African American, 15.1% versus 13.4%; Asian, 1.8% versus 5.9%; Hispanic or Latino, 14.0% versus 18.5%; Non-Hispanic White, 63.5% versus 60.1%). However, this was not the case for the individual pharmaceutical, vaccine, and ViiV data sets; least represented groups were Asian individuals for pharmaceutical and ViiV trials and American Indian or Alaskan Native individuals for vaccine trials (6.2%, 11.8%, and 11.1% of trials met/exceeded census level representation, respectively). The percentage of trials reaching/exceeding census levels also varied per trial phase for race and ethnicity. Furthermore, disparities in the percentage of trials reaching/exceeding census levels versus epidemiology-based prevalence levels have revealed opportunities to improve industry success metrics; in HIV trials, the proportion of Black or African American individuals (35.1%) exceeded census (13.4%) but not epidemiologic levels (55.3%).

CONCLUSION

Further work is required to achieve demographic diversity across clinical trials. We conclude that US Census data are an inappropriate universal benchmark. A shift to epidemiology benchmarking will enable the consideration of global participants into US analyses for highly intrinsic (i.e. influenced by ancestry) diseases and more firm requirements for US-based participants into US analyses for extrinsic (i.e. influenced by location or culture) diseases. Benchmarking in line with epidemiologic data will allow us to set better trial enrollment goals, with the aim of conducting more demographically balanced, diverse, and representative clinical trials and enabling a better understanding of drug safety and efficacy per demographic group.

Characterizing altruistic motivation in potential volunteers for SARS-CoV-2 challenge trials

In human challenge trials (HCTs), volunteers are deliberately infected with an infectious agent. Such trials can be used to accelerate vaccine development and answer important scientific questions. Starting early in the COVID-19 pandemic, ethical concerns were raised about using HCTs to accelerate development and approval of a vaccine. Some of those concerns pertained to potential exploitation of and/or lack of truly informed consent from volunteers. Specific areas of concern arose around individuals who may be unusually risk-seeking or too economically vulnerable to refuse the payments these trials provide, as opposed to being motivated primarily by altruistic goals. This pre-registered study is the first large-scale survey to characterize people who, early in the pandemic, expressed interest and intention to volunteer to participate in COVID-19 HCTs. We found that individuals expressing interest in SARS-CoV-2 HCTs exhibit consistently altruistic motivations without any special indication of poor risk perception or economic vulnerability. In finding that, early in the pandemic, COVID-19 HCTs were able to attract volunteers whose values align with the nature of these trials, and who are not unusually vulnerable to exploitation, this study may allay some ethical concerns about the volunteers interested in participating in such trials.

Why not? Motivations for entering a volunteer register for clinical trials during the COVID-19 pandemic

Backgrounds

Healthy volunteers play a key role in clinical trials and it is crucial to develop recruitment strategies that capitalise on their motivations and maximise their participation. The COVID-19 pandemic has shown the importance of finding motivated healthy volunteers for the development of new vaccines. Public registers represent a promising way to promote the participation of healthy volunteers in the research field, but their adoption is still limited. The current study aimed to explore the motivations of healthy volunteers to enrol in an Italian public register for clinical trials during the COVID-19 pandemic and their attitude toward participating in a phase 1 COVID-19 vaccine clinical trial. The impacts of different enrolling interview modalities (in person, by phone, by mail) on motivation, understanding of information and trust in researchers were also investigated.

Methods

An online survey investigating experience with COVID-19, motivations to enrol, trust in researchers, political and healthcare authorities and pharmacological companies was presented to people applying as healthy volunteers in the public register for clinical trials at Phase 1 Unit Research Centre of ASST Monza, Italy, and considering to participate in a COVID-19 vaccine clinical trial. Data were collected in June 2021.

Results

Altruistic motivations were the main driver for enrolling in the public register, while self-interested motivations were secondary. No gender differences were found. As for enrolling modalities, no differences emerged between in-person and interviews for motivation to enrol, understanding of information and trust in researchers. Email modality led to significantly lower volunteers’ satisfaction and understanding of information but similar trust in research.

Conclusions

This study supports the validity of different interview modalities (in person and by phone) for the enrolment of healthy volunteers for clinical trials and highlights the positive role of public registers for the recruitment procedures.

Racial and Ethnic Diversity of US Participants in Clinical Trials for Acne, Atopic Dermatitis, and Psoriasis: A Comprehensive Review

An increasing body of literature describes underreporting of race and ethnicity, and overrepresentation of White individuals in clinical trials. We aimed to evaluate the racial and ethnic diversity of US participants in clinical trials for acne, atopic dermatitis (AD), and psoriasis. We performed a comprehensive review of clinical trials for these common dermatologic diseases that were published between January 2014 and July 2019. Race and ethnicity reporting among all trials, and the racial and ethnic distribution of US participants were compared by skin disease, intervention type, and trial phase. In total, 103 articles representing 119 unique trials were evaluated. Race and ethnicity were reported in only 22.7% of trials. The proportion of White participants (77.5%) was higher than that of the US population (72.5%, p < 0.01); a finding largely driven by psoriasis trials (84.7% White). The proportions of non-White and Hispanic individuals in non-topical (21.0% and 16.3%, respectively) and phase III (20.5% and 18.7%, respectively) trials were lower than those in topical (23.5% and 23.3%, respectively; p < 0.01) and phase I/II trials (25.6% and 22.3%, respectively; p < 0.01). Race and ethnicity remain underreported in dermatologic clinical trials, and US trial participant diversity differs by skin disease, intervention type, and trial phase.

The Role of Transportation in the Enrollment of Elderly African Americans into Exercise and Memory Study: GEMS Study

BACKGROUND

Understanding the factors driving recruitment and enrollment of African Americans (AA)s in clinical translational research will assure that underrepresented populations benefit from scientific progress and new developments in the diagnosis and treatment of Alzheimer's disease and related disorders. While transportation is pivotal to volunteers' ability to participate in research, its contribution to enrollment in exercise studies on AD is yet to be elucidated. Thus, this research focuses on identifying factors that influence the recruitment and enrollment of African Americans in biomedical studies and determining whether the availability of transportation motivates participation in time-demanding exercise studies on AD.

METHODS

We analyzed recruitment data collected from 567 volunteers ages 55 and older screened through various recruitment sources and considered for enrollment in our exercise and memory study. To determine whether transportation influenced the enrollment of African Americans (AA)s in biomedical studies, multiple logistic regression analysis was performed to identify significant factors that drive enrollment. Furthermore, the association of race and demographic factors on the availability of transportation was assessed.

RESULTS

Demographic factors, age at screening, education, gender, and cognitive scores were not significantly different among those enrolled compared to control (not-enrolled). In the relationship of enrollment to transportation, enrolled participants were more likely to have access to transportation (79.12%) than not-enrolled participants who had less access to transportation (71.6%); however, the association was not statistically significant. However, race differentially influenced the likelihood of enrollment, with elderly AAs being significantly less likely to have transportation (p = 0.020) than the Whites but more likely than "others" to have transportation.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that access to transportation may be a key factor motivating enrollment in an exercise and memory study in a predominantly AA sample. Notably, AAs in our sample were less likely to have transportation than Whites. Other demographic factors and cognitive scores did not significantly influence enrollment in our sample. A larger sample and more detailed assessment of transportation are needed to further discern the role of transportation in clinical trials.