Clinical trials during the COVID-19 pandemic: Challenges of putting scientific and ethical principles into practice

Agile response to critical need for clinical trial accessibility during the first COVID-19 pandemic wave

This article discusses some of the major challenges that the clinical research community faced during the early days of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. A model is offered that may assist other institutions while planning for future pandemics or disasters.

Structural under-reporting of informed consent, data handling and sharing, ethical approval, and application of Open Science principles as proxies for study quality conduct in COVID-19 research: a systematic scoping review

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic required science to provide answers rapidly to combat the outbreak. Hence, the reproducibility and quality of conducting research may have been threatened, particularly regarding privacy and data protection, in varying ways around the globe. The objective was to investigate aspects of reporting informed consent and data handling as proxies for study quality conduct.

METHODS

A systematic scoping review was performed by searching PubMed and Embase. The search was performed on November 8th, 2020. Studies with hospitalised patients diagnosed with COVID-19 over 18 years old were eligible for inclusion. With a focus on informed consent, data were extracted on the study design, prestudy protocol registration, ethical approval, data anonymisation, data sharing and data transfer as proxies for study quality. For reasons of comparison, data regarding country income level, study location and journal impact factor were also collected.

RESULTS

972 studies were included. 21.3% of studies reported informed consent, 42.6% reported waivers of consent, 31.4% did not report consent information and 4.7% mentioned other types of consent. Informed consent reporting was highest in clinical trials (94.6%) and lowest in retrospective cohort studies (15.0%). The reporting of consent versus no consent did not differ significantly by journal impact factor (p=0.159). 16.8% of studies reported a prestudy protocol registration or design. Ethical approval was described in 90.9% of studies. Information on anonymisation was provided in 17.0% of studies. In 257 multicentre studies, 1.2% reported on data sharing agreements, and none reported on Findable, Accessible, Interoperable and Reusable data principles. 1.2% reported on open data. Consent was most often reported in the Middle East (42.4%) and least often in North America (4.7%). Only one report originated from a low-income country.

DISCUSSION

Informed consent and aspects of data handling and sharing were under-reported in publications concerning COVID-19 and differed between countries, which strains study quality conduct when in dire need of answers.

Key ethical issues encountered during COVID-19 research: a thematic analysis of perspectives from South African research ethics committees

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic presents significant challenges to research ethics committees (RECs) in balancing urgency of review of COVID-19 research with careful consideration of risks and benefits. In the African context, RECs are further challenged by historical mistrust of research and potential impacts on COVID-19 related research participation, as well as the need to facilitate equitable access to effective treatments or vaccines for COVID-19. In South Africa, an absent National Health Research Ethics Council (NHREC) also left RECs without national guidance for a significant duration of the COVID-19 pandemic. We conducted a qualitative descriptive study that explored the perspectives and experiences of RECs regarding the ethical challenges of COVID-19 research in South Africa.

METHODS

We conducted in-depth interviews with 21 REC chairpersons or members from seven RECs at large academic health institutions across South Africa that were actively involved in the review of COVID-19 related research from January to April 2021. In-depth interviews were conducted remotely via Zoom. Interviews (60-125 min) were conducted in English using an in-depth interview guide, until data saturation was achieved. Audio-recordings were transcribed verbatim and field notes were converted into data documents. Line-by-line coding of transcripts was performed, and data were organised into themes and sub-themes. An inductive approach to thematic analysis was used to analyse data.

RESULTS

Five main themes were identified, namely: rapidly evolving research ethics landscape, extreme vulnerability of research participants, unique challenges to informed consent, challenges to community engagement during COVID-19, and overlapping research ethics and public health equity issues. Sub-themes were identified for each main theme.

CONCLUSIONS

Numerous, significant ethical complexities and challenges were identified by South African REC members in the review of COVID-19 related research. While RECs are resilient and adaptable, reviewer and REC member fatigue were major concerns. The numerous ethical issues identified also highlight the need for research ethics teaching and training, especially in informed consent, as well as the urgent requirement for the development of national guidelines for research ethics during public health emergencies. Further, comparative analysis between different countries is needed to develop the discourse around African RECs and COVID-19 research ethics issues.

A Survey on Methodological Issues of Clinical Research Studies Reviewed by Independent Ethic Committees during the COVID-19 Pandemic in Italy

The struggle for information and the hasty search for answers caused by the COVID-19 pandemic threatened the possibility of lowering study quality, as well as ethical committees' review standards during the outbreak. Our investigation aimed to assess the impact of COVID-19 on the quality of clinical research studies submitted to Italian Ethics Committees in the period between April and July 2020. All 91 Italian ethics committees were contacted via email in order to collect anonymized information on the type and quality of COVID-19-related studies submitted to each committee during the study period. The present study summarizes the characteristics of the 184 study applications collected, pointing out, especially, how the quality of the study population and statistical analysis are crucial variables in determining the study approval. Nevertheless, despite the need for high-quality and open scientific information, especially exacerbated by this particular historical period, only a minority of the ethics committees (20.9%) agreed to share their data; such scarce participation, beyond biasing the representativeness of the results obtained by the present study, more importantly, hinders the broader goal of creating trust between researchers and the general public.

Barreras y facilitadores para la investigación en ciencias de la salud durante la crisis del COVID-19: una revisión de alcance

Objetivo:

La pandemia ocasionada por el Covid-19 ha significado un gran desafío para la investigación en salud por la necesidad de dar una respuesta oportuna y efectiva a esta situación de crisis. Es importante proveer una visión panorámica sobre las principales barreras y facilitadores encontrados en la conducción de estudios en ciencias de la salud durante la crisis del Covid-19, así como también de las iniciativas en investigación sugeridas por autoridades en salud de investigación a nivel global, regional o local.

Materiales y métodos:

Se desarrolló una revisión sistemática de alcance. Se hizo una búsqueda de la literatura en Medline, Cochrane library, Lilacs y Google Scholar. Se incluyeron estudios de investigación originales, artículos de revisión, de opinión y editoriales disponibles en texto completo, publicados entre enero de 2020 y mayo de 2021 en español, inglés o portugués. Se hizo selección de los documentos y extracción de los datos por dos autores de manera independiente. Las barreras y facilitadores identificados fueron descritos y organizados en cuatro categorías a partir de la literatura: socioculturales, administrativos, organizacionales y metodológicos. Asimismo, se incluyeron documentos y comunicados oficiales de autoridades en salud e investigación a nivel global, regional y local. Los resultados se presentan de manera narrativa y en tablas.

Resultados:

Se seleccionaron 26 documentos para el análisis y síntesis de la información. Las barreras mencionadas más frecuentemente en la literatura incluyen las dificultades en cuanto al acceso a los participantes, a los trámites asociados a los comités de ética; así como el riesgo biológico para los investigadores y la falta de coordinación inter e intrainstitucional. Por su parte, los facilitadores identificados incluyen la adopción de soluciones virtuales, el trabajo cooperativo entre los actores de la investigación y la flexibilidad en el proceso de obtención del consentimiento informado. Frente a las iniciativas difundidas por las autoridades en salud e investigación, se identificaron cuatro estrategias relacionadas con la priorización de preguntas de investigación, el fomento de la cooperación y la inclusión en la investigación, la lucha contra la infodemia y el fortalecimiento de la calidad metodológica de los estudios.

Conclusiones:

Para la investigación en el contexto de la pandemia representa un desafío continuar con la cooperación e interoperabilidad entre las instituciones, los países y las disciplinas, con el fin de facilitar los procesos investigativos en el futuro; del mismo modo, cobra importancia mantener la ciencia abierta y la financiación de estudios cooperativos cuando surjan otras prioridades. Asimismo, es evidente la necesidad de desarrollar y sostener mecanismos que gestionen la información de manera eficiente para la toma de decisiones. Se requiere evaluar de manera continua los efectos que ha dejado esta pandemia en la práctica de la investigación en ciencias de la salud para comprender de manera integral lo que debemos aprender como sociedad a partir de las crisis.

Patient and Citizen Participation in the Identification of Ethical Considerations Aiming to Address Uncertainty in the Evaluation of Promising Interventions in a Pandemic Context

Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, numerous studies have been conducted to identify interventions that could contribute to alleviating the burden it has caused. The Institut national d'excellence en santé et en services sociaux (INESSS) has played a key role in informing the government of Québec regarding the evaluation of specific pandemic-related interventions. This process took place in a context characterized by a sense of urgency to assess and recommend potential interventions that could save lives and reduce the effects of the disease on populations and healthcare systems, which increased the pressure on the regulatory agencies leading these evaluations. While some of the interventions examined were considered promising, results from COVID-19 studies often led to uncertainty regarding their efficacy or safety. Regulatory agencies evaluating the value of promising interventions thus face challenges in deciding whether these should be made available to the population, particularly when assessing their benefit-risk balance. To shed light on these challenges, we identified underlying ethical considerations that can influence such an assessment. A rapid literature review was conducted in February 2021, to identify the main challenges associated with the benefit-risk balance assessment of promising interventions. To reinforce our understanding of the underlying ethical considerations, we initiated a discussion among various social actors involved in critical thinking surrounding the evaluation of promising interventions, including ethicists, clinicians and researchers involved in clinical or public health practice, as well as patients and citizens. This discussion allowed us to create a space for exchange and mutual understanding among these various actors who contributed equally to the identification of ethical considerations. The knowledge and perspectives stemming from the scientific literature and those consulted were integrated in a common reflection on these ethical considerations. This allowed patients and citizens, directly affected by the evaluation of pandemic-related interventions and the resulting social choices, to contribute to the identification of the relevant ethical considerations. It also allowed for reflection on the responsibilities of the various actors involved in the development, evaluation, and distribution of promising interventions in a setting of urgency and uncertainty, such as that brought about by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Consent concerns in clinical trials of investigational therapies for COVID-19: Vulnerability versus voluntariness

Obtaining informed consent from vulnerable patients participating in clinical trials of investigational therapies for COVID-19 is a major ethical challenge. Ethical and operational considerations – voluntariness, waiver, timing, time, documentation, and responsibilities of the sponsor, the investigator, and the ethics committee – are discussed briefly.

COVID-19 and Clinical Trials: Current Challenges and Future Directions

BACKGROUND

The outbreak of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has posed a major threat to people's lives across the globe. It has drastically changed the way we perceive this world. A paradigm shift was observed globally as the world's emphasis shifted to testing, diagnosis, treatment, and developing a coronavirus cure. Clinical trials were also not untouched by this. The coronavirus pandemic has abhorrently affected the day-to-day clinical trial activities at sites.

METHODS

The status of various ongoing clinical trials was assessed through a literature search, which also includes clinical trial portals. Our evaluations were based on these observations.

RESULTS

Multiple challenges were present in clinical trials as recruitment, retention, the safety of trial subjects, protocol compliance, and this made the world to re-think to incorporate newer strategies and to cope with this untoward situation.

CONCLUSION

Digitalization of clinical trials as virtual management of adverse events, remote monitoring visits, and web-based consulting with trial subjects are potential directions that can be applied to better manage clinical trials worldwide.