Clinical trials in low and middle-income countries - Successes and challenges.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Grover S
PROVIDER: S-EPMC5157789 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Feb
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Clinical trials in low and middle-income countries - Successes and challenges.
Grover Surbhi S Xu Melody M Jhingran Anuja A Mahantshetty Umesh U Chuang Linus L Small William W Gaffney David D
Gynecologic oncology reports 20161125
Gynecologic malignancies affect women in low and middle-income countries (LMICs) at equal or higher rates compared to high income countries (HICs), yet practice guidelines based on clinical trials performed in HICs do not routinely account for resource disparities between these regions. There is a need and growing interest for executing clinical trials in LMICs. This has led to the creation of multinational cooperative groups and the initiation of several ongoing clinical trials in Mexico, China ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:ImportanceThe burden of cancer falls disproportionally on low-middle-income countries (LMICs). It is not well known how novel therapies are tested in current clinical trials and the extent to which they match global disease burden.ObjectivesTo describe the design, results, and publication of oncology randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and examine the extent to which trials match global disease burden and how trial methods and results differ across economic settings.Design, setting, and participantsIn this retrospective cohort study, a literature search identified all phase 3 RCTs evaluating anticancer therapies published from 2014 to 2017. Randomized clinical trials were classified based on World Bank economic classification. Descriptive statistics were used to compare RCT design and results from high-income countries (HICs) and low/middle-income countries (LMICs). Statistical analysis was conducted in January 2020.Main outcomes and measuresDifferences in the design, results, and output of RCTs between HICs and LMICs.ResultsThe study cohort included 694 RCTs: 636 (92%) led by HICs and 58 (8%) led by LMICs. A total of 601 RCTs (87%) tested systemic therapy and 88 RCTs (13%) tested radiotherapy or surgery. The proportion of RCTs relative to global deaths was higher for breast cancer (121 RCTs [17%] and 7% of deaths) but lower for gastroesophageal cancer (38 RCTs [6%] and 14% of deaths), liver cancer (14 RCTs [2%] and 8% of deaths), pancreas cancer (14 RCTs [2%] and 5% of deaths), and cervical cancer (9 RCTs [1%] and 3% of deaths). Randomized clinical trials in HICs were more likely than those in LMICs to be funded by industry (464 [73%] vs 24 [41%]; P < .001). Studies in LMICs were smaller than those in HICs (median, 219 [interquartile range, 137-363] vs 474 [interquartile range, 262-743] participants; P < .001) and more likely to meet their primary end points (39 of 58 [67%] vs 286 of 636 [45%]; P = .001). The observed median effect size among superiority trials was larger in LMICs compared with HICs (hazard ratio, 0.62 [interquartile range, 0.54-0.76] vs 0.84 [interquartile range, 0.67-0.97]; P < .001). Studies from LMICs were published in journals with lower median impact factors than studies from HICs (7 [interquartile range, 4-21] vs 21 [interquartile range, 7-34]; P < .001). Publication bias persisted when adjusted for whether a trial was positive or negative (median impact factor: LMIC negative trial, 5 [interquartile range, 4-6] vs HIC negative trial, 18 [interquartile range, 6-26]; LMIC positive trial, 9 [interquartile range, 5-25] vs HIC positive trial, 25 [interquartile range, 10-48]; P < .001).Conclusions and relevanceThis study suggests that oncology RCTs are conducted predominantly by HICs and do not match the global burden of cancer. Randomized clinical trials from LMICs are more likely to identify effective therapies and have a larger effect size than RCTs from HICs. This study suggests that there is a funding and publication bias against RCTs led by LMICs. Policy makers, research funders, and journals need to address this issue with a range of measures including building capacity and capability in RCTs.
| S-EPMC7844695 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The epidemiology, clinical characteristics, management and outcome of Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) differ between low-income and middle-income countries (LMIC) and high-income countries (HIC). At present, limited data are available on GBS in LMIC and the true incidence of GBS in many LMIC remains unknown. Increased understanding of GBS in LMIC is needed because poor hygiene and high exposure to infections render populations in LMIC vulnerable to GBS outbreaks. Furthermore, insufficient diagnostic and health-care facilities in LMIC contribute to delayed diagnosis in patients with severe presentations of GBS. In addition, the lack of national clinical guidelines and absence of affordable, effective treatments contribute to worse outcomes and higher mortality in LMIC than HIC. Systematic population-based surveillance studies, cohort and case-control studies are required to understand the incidence and risk factors for GBS. Novel, targeted and cost-effective treatment strategies need to be developed in the context of health system challenges in LMIC. To ensure integrative rehabilitation services in LMIC, existing prognostic models must be validated, and responsive outcome measures that are cross-culturally applicable must be developed. Therefore, fundamental and applied research to improve the clinical management of GBS in LMIC should become a critical focus of future research programmes.
| S-EPMC7920001 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Purpose of Review:Surveillance of communicable diseases is essential in all countries to prevent and control infections, to detect outbreaks and also to see the effects of interventions. The data should be reliable, and collection, analysis and feedback as well as the action based on this data should be fast. In this article, author discusses the limitations the Low Middle income Countries (LMICs) have in implementing disease surveillance and some suggestions for improvement. Recent Findings:Integrated Disease Surveillance and Response (IDSR) has been implemented successfully through most of the countries in Africa though they belong to low or LMIC. Major barriers for surveillance of Healthcare Associated Infections in LMICs are non-availability of adequate number of healthcare personnel such as infection control personnel as well as not having an integrated healthcare system with an effective data flow. For some infections, not having proper diagnostic facilities is a major obstacle. An important capacity limitation in clinical laboratories of LMICs is identification of antimicrobial resistant organisms as well as other pathogens to species level. This affects the surveillance of infections and antimicrobial resistance. Summary:Use of modern technology, capacity building including the human resources as well as the laboratory capacity in healthcare setting, improving data communication methods, are the main recommendations made. Education and training of healthcare staff as well as educating the general public to change the attitudes of people is another aspect that we need to concentrate.
| S-EPMC7453076 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceMany randomized clinical trials (RCTs) led by high-income countries (HICs) now enroll patients from lower middle-income countries (LMICs) and upper middle-income countries (UMICs). Although enrolling diverse populations promotes research collaborations, there are issues regarding which countries participate in RCTs and how this participation may contribute to global research.ObjectiveTo describe which UMICs and LMICs participate in RCTs led by HICs.Design, setting, and participantsA cross-sectional study of all oncology RCTs published globally during January 1, 2014, to December 31, 2017, was conducted. The study cohort was restricted to RCTs led by HICs that enrolled participants from LMICs and UMICs. Study analyses were conducted in November 1, 2021, to May 31, 2022.Main outcomes and measuresA bibliometric approach (Web of Science 2007-2017) was used to explore whether RCT participation was proportional to other measures of cancer research activity. Participation in RCTs (ie, percentage of RCTs in the cohort in which each LMIC and UMIC participated) was compared with country-level cancer research bibliometric output (ie, percentage of total cancer research bibliometric output from the same group of countries that came from a specific LMIC and UMIC).ResultsAmong the 636 HIC-led RCTs, 186 trials (29%) enrolled patients in LMICs (n = 84 trials involving 11 LMICs) and/or UMICs (n = 181 trials involving 26 UMICs). The most common participating LMICs were India (42 [50%]), Ukraine (39 [46%]), Philippines (23 [27%]), and Egypt (12 [14%]). The most common participating UMICs were Russia (115 [64%]), Brazil (94 [52%]), Romania (62 [34%]), China (56 [31%]), Mexico (56 [31%]), and South Africa (54 [30%]). Several LMICs are overrepresented in the cohort of RCTs based on proportional cancer research bibliometric output: Ukraine (46% of RCTs but 2% of cancer research bibliometric output), Philippines (27% RCTs, 1% output), and Georgia (8% RCTs, 0.2% output). Overrepresented UMICs include Russia (64% RCTs, 2% output), Romania (34% RCTs, 2% output), Mexico (31% RCTs, 2% output), and South Africa (30% RCTs, 1% output).Conclusions and relevanceIn this cross-sectional study, a substantial proportion of RCTs led by HICs enrolled patients in LMICs and UMICs. The LMICs and UMICs that participated in these trials did not match overall cancer bibliometric output as a surrogate for research ecosystem maturity. Reasons for this apparent discordance and how these data may inform future capacity-strengthening activities require further study.
| S-EPMC9389348 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Clinical trials in neurovirology illustrate the special challenges confronting investigators planning to study these conditions, as well as the contributions of successful trials in establishing appropriate management for these devastating diseases. This article reviews key examples of progress in neurovirology that have been spurred by clinical trials, emphasizing human herpes virus encephalitis, HIV, and JC virus. Clinical trials in the setting of neurovirological diseases are characterized by specific challenges, which may include small sample sizes, clinical presentations from life-threatening conditions to chronic courses of disease, regional and temporally restricted outbreaks scenarios, and the unavailability of validated diagnostic tests that can be rapidly deployed at the bedside. This review aims to highlight these methodological challenges and pitfalls in designing and executing clinical neurovirology trials, as well as to outline innovative trial designs, which could be useful in addressing common challenges.
| S-EPMC4965408 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundClinical collaboration between spine professionals in high-income countries (HICs) and low-and-middle-income countries (LMICs) may provide improvements in the accessibility, efficacy, and safety of global spine care. Currently, the scope and effectiveness of these collaborations remain unclear. In this review, we describe the literature on the current state of these partnerships to provide a framework for exploring future best practices.MethodsPubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were queried for articles on spine-based clinical partnerships between HICs and LMICs published between 2000 and March 10, 2023. This search yielded 1528 total publications. After systematic screening, nineteen articles were included in the final review.ResultsAll published partnerships involved direct clinical care and 13/19 included clinical training of local providers. Most of the published collaborations reviewed involved one of four major global outreach organizations with the majority of sites in Africa. Participants were primarily physicians and physicians-in-training. Only 5/19 studies reported needs assessments prior to starting their partnerships. Articles were split on evaluative focus, with some only evaluating clinical outcomes and some evaluating the nature of the partnership itself.ConclusionsPublished studies on spine-focused clinical partnerships between HICs and LMICs remain scarce. Those that are published often do not report needs assessments and formal metrics to evaluate the efficacy of such partnerships. Toward improving the quality of spine care globally, we recommend an increase in the quality and quantity of published studies involving clinical collaborations between HICs and LICs, with careful attention to reporting early needs assessments and evaluation strategies.
| S-EPMC10553237 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The burden of chronic kidney disease (CKD) is growing globally, particularly in low- and lower-middle-income countries (LLMICs) where access to treatment is poor and the largest increases in disease burden will occur. The individual and societal costs of kidney disease are well recognized, especially in developed health care systems where treatments for the advanced stages of CKD are more readily available. The consequences of CKD are potentially more catastrophic in developing health care systems where such resources are often lacking. Central to addressing this challenge is the availability of data to understand disease burden and ensure that investments in treatments and health resources are effective at a local level. Use of routinely collected administrative data is helpful in this regard, however, the barriers to developing a more systematic focus on data collection should not be underestimated. This article reviews the current tools that have been used to measure the burden of CKD and considers limitations regarding their use in LLMICs. A review of the literature investigating the use of registries, disease specific databases and administrative data to identify populations with CKD in LLMICs, which indicate these to be underused resources, is included. Suggestions regarding the potential use of administrative data for measuring CKD burden in LLMICs are explored.
| S-EPMC8207309 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In recent decades low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) have been witnessing a significant shift toward raised blood pressure; yet in LMICs, only 1 in 3 are aware of their hypertension status, and ≈8% have their blood pressure controlled. This rising burden widens the inequality gap, contributes to massive economic hardships of patients and carers, and increases costs to the health system, facing challenges such as low physician-to-patient ratios and lack of access to medicines. Established risk factors include unhealthy diet (high salt and low fruit and vegetable intake), physical inactivity, tobacco and alcohol use, and obesity. Emerging risk factors include pollution (air, water, noise, and light), urbanization, and a loss of green space. Risk factors that require further in-depth research are low birth weight and social and commercial determinants of health. Global actions include the HEARTS technical package and the push for universal health care. Promising research efforts highlight that successful interventions are feasible in LMICs. These include creation of health-promoting environments by introducing salt-reduction policies and sugar and alcohol tax; implementing cost-effective screening and simplified treatment protocols to mitigate treatment inertia; pooled procurement of low-cost single-pill combination therapy to improve adherence; increasing access to telehealth and mHealth (mobile health); and training health care staff, including community health workers, to strengthen team-based care. As the blood pressure trajectory continues creeping upward in LMICs, contextual research on effective, safe, and cost-effective interventions is urgent. New emergent risk factors require novel solutions. Lowering blood pressure in LMICs requires urgent global political and scientific priority and action.
| S-EPMC8091106 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThere is need for more data on critical care outcomes and interventions from low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). Global research collaborations could help improve health-care delivery for critically ill children in LMIC where child mortality rates remain high.Materials and methodsTo inform the role of collaborative research in health-care delivery for critically ill children in LMIC, an anonymous online survey of pediatric critical care (PCC) physicians from LMIC was conducted to assess priorities, major challenges, and potential solutions to PCC research. A convenience sample of 56 clinician-researchers taking care of critically ill children in LMIC was targeted. In addition, the survey was made available on a Latin American PCC website. Descriptive statistics were used for data analysis.ResultsThe majority of the 47 survey respondents worked at urban, public teaching hospitals in LMIC. Respondents stated their primary PCC research motivations were to improve clinical care and establish guidelines to standardize care. Top challenges to conducting research were lack of funding, high clinical workload, and limited research support staff. Respondent-proposed solutions to these challenges included increasing research funding options for LMIC, better access to mentors from high-income countries, research training and networks, and higher quality medical record documentation.ConclusionLMIC clinician-researchers must be better empowered and resourced to lead and influence the local and global health research agenda for critically ill children. Increased funding options, access to training and mentorship in research methodology, and improved data collection systems for LMIC PCC researchers were recognized as key needs for success.
| S-EPMC5744187 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC9629793 | biostudies-literature