Dataset Information

A systematic review of trial registry entries for randomized clinical trials investigating COVID-19 medical prevention and treatment.

ABSTRACT: AIM:To identify investigated interventions for COVID-19 prevention or treatment via trial registry entries on planned or ongoing randomised clinical trials. To assess these registry entries for recruitment status, planned trial size, blinding and reporting of mortality. METHODS:We identified trial registry entries systematically via the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and 33 trial registries up to June 23, 2020. We included relevant trial registry entries for randomized clinical trials investigating medical preventive, adjunct or supportive therapies and therapeutics for treatment of COVID-19. Studies with non-random and single-arm design were excluded. Trial registry entries were screened by two authors independently and data were systematically extracted. RESULTS:We included 1303 trial registry entries from 71 countries investigating 381 different single interventions. Blinding was planned in 47% of trials. Sample size was >200 participants in 40% of trials and a total of 611,364 participants were planned for inclusion. Mortality was listed as an outcome in 57% of trials. Recruitment was ongoing in 54% of trials and completed in 8%. Thirty-five percent were multicenter trials. The five most frequent investigational categories were immune modulating drugs (266 trials (20%)), unconventional medicine (167 trials (13%)), antimalarial drugs (118 trials (9%)), antiviral drugs (100 trials (8%)) and respiratory adjuncts (78 trials (6%)). The five most frequently tested uni-modal interventions were: chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine (113 trials with 199,841 participants); convalescent plasma (64 trials with 11,840 participants); stem cells (51 trials with 3,370 participants); tocilizumab (19 trials with 4,139 participants) and favipiravir (19 trials with 3,210 participants). CONCLUSION:An extraordinary number of randomized clinical trials investigating COVID-19 management have been initiated with a multitude of medical preventive, adjunctive and treatment modalities. Blinding will be used in only 47% of trials, which may have influence on future reported treatment effects. Fifty-seven percent of all trials will assess mortality as an outcome facilitating future meta-analyses.

SUBMITTER: Karlsen APH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7444584 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A systematic review of trial registry entries for randomized clinical trials investigating COVID-19 medical prevention and treatment.

Karlsen Anders Peder Højer APH Wiberg Sebastian S Laigaard Jens J Pedersen Casper C Rokamp Kim Zillo KZ Mathiesen Ole O

PloS one 20200820 8

<h4>Aim</h4>To identify investigated interventions for COVID-19 prevention or treatment via trial registry entries on planned or ongoing randomised clinical trials. To assess these registry entries for recruitment status, planned trial size, blinding and reporting of mortality.<h4>Methods</h4>We identified trial registry entries systematically via the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and 33 trial registries up to June 23, 2020. We included relevant trial registry entries for r ...[more]

PMID: 32817689

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background/aimsHigh follow-up is critical in randomized clinical trials. We developed novel approaches to modify in-person visits and complete follow-up during COVID-19. Since these strategies are broadly applicable to circumstances wherein follow-up is difficult, they may help in contingency planning. The objective of this article is to develop and evaluate new approaches to replace detailed, in-person study visits for two trials focused on preventing diabetic foot complications.MethodsA quasi-experimental pre-post design compared approaches for follow-up during COVID-19 to approaches pre-COVID-19. Study subjects were outpatients at two Veterans Affairs Medical Centers. Following a research "hold," research resumed in February 2021 for Self-monitoring, Thermometry and Educating Patients for Ulcer Prevention (STEP UP) (n = 241), which focused on preventing recurrent foot ulcers, and in April 2021 for Preventing Amputation by Tailored Risk-based Intervention to Optimize Therapy (PATRIOT) (n = 406), which focused on preventing pre-ulcerative and ulcerative lesions. To complete data collection, we shortened visits, focused on primary and secondary outcomes, and conducted virtual visits when appropriate. For STEP UP, we created a 20-min assessment process that could be administered by phone. Since PATRIOT required plantar photographs to assess foot lesions, we conducted short face-to-face visits. We explored differences and assessed proportion completing visit, visit completion/100 person-months and compared COVID-19 to pre- COVID-19 using unadjusted risk ratios, incidence rate ratios, all with associated 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Finally, we report time-to-visit curves.ResultsIn both studies, participants whose follow-up concluded pre- COVID-19 seemed older than those whose follow-up concluded during COVID-19 (PATRIOT: 68.0 (67.2, 68.9) versus 65.2 years (61.9, 68.5); STEP UP: 67.5 (66.2, 68.9) versus 65.3 (63.3, 67.3)). For STEP UP, we completed 91 visits pre- COVID-19 (37.8% (31.6%, 44.2%)) and 63 visits during COVID-19 (78.8% (68.2%, 87.1%)). This was over 1309 person-months pre-COVID-19, and over 208.8 person-months during COVID-19; the visit completion rate/100 person-months were: pre-COVID-19 7.0 (5.6, 8.5), COVID-19 30.2 (23.2, 38.6); risk ratio: 2.1 (1.7, 2.5); and incidence rate ratio 4.3 (3.1, 5.9). Similarly, for PATRIOT, we completed 316 visits pre-COVID-19 (77.8% (73.5%, 81.8%)) and 27 assessments during COVID-19 (84.4% (67.2%, 94.7%)). This was over 1192.7 person-months pre-COVID-19 and 39.3 person-months during COVID-19. The visit completion rate/100 person-months in PATRIOT were: pre-COVID-19 2.7 (2.4, 3.0), COVID-19 6.9 (4.5, 10); risk ratio 1.1 (0.9, 1.3); incidence rate ratio 2.6 (1.8, 3.8). For both studies, the follow-up curves began separating at < 2 months.ConclusionsWe achieved higher completion rates during COVID-19 compared to pre-COVID-19 by modifying visits and focusing on primary and secondary outcomes. These strategies prevent excessive missing data, support more valid conclusions, and improve efficiency. They may provide important alternative strategies to achieving higher follow-up in randomized clinical trials.

Project description:BackgroundPost-acute COVID-19 syndrome (PACS) is a well-recognized, complex, systemic disease which is associated with substantial morbidity. There is a paucity of established interventions for the treatment of patients with this syndrome.ObjectivesTo systematically review registered trials currently investigating therapeutic modalities for PACS.Data sourcesA search was conducted up to the 16 September, 2022, using the COVID-19 section of the WHO Internal Clinical Trials Registry Platform.Study eligibility criteria, participants, and interventionsInterventional clinical trials of any sample size examining any therapeutic modality targeting persistent symptoms among individuals after diagnosis with COVID-19.MethodsData on trial characteristics and intervention characteristics were collected and summarized.ResultsAfter screening 17 125 trials, 388 trials, from 42 countries, were eligible. In total, we had 406 interventions, of which 368 were mono-therapeutic strategies, whereas 38 were intervention combinations. Among 824 primary outcomes identified, there were >300 different outcomes. Rehabilitation was the most employed class of intervention in 169 trials. We encountered 76 trials examining the pharmacological agents of various classes, with the most common agent being colchicine. Complementary and alternative medicine encompassed 64 trials exploring traditional Chinese medicine, Ayurveda, homeopathic medications, naturopathic medications, vitamins, dietary supplements, and botanicals. Psychotherapeutic and educational interventions were also employed in 12 and 4 trials, respectively. Other interventions, including transcranial direct current stimulation, transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation, general electrical stimulation, cranial electrotherapy stimulation, various stem cell interventions, and oxygen therapy interventions, were also employed.ConclusionWe identified 388 registered trials, with a high degree of heterogeneity, exploring 144 unique mono-therapeutic interventions for PACS. Most studies target general alleviation of symptoms. There is a need for further high-quality and methodologically robust PACS treatment trials to be conducted with standardization of outcomes while following WHO's recommendation for uniform evaluation and treatment.

Dataset Information

A systematic review of trial registry entries for randomized clinical trials investigating COVID-19 medical prevention and treatment.

Publications

A systematic review of trial registry entries for randomized clinical trials investigating COVID-19 medical prevention and treatment.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets