Dataset Information

Quality Assessment of the Chinese Clinical Trial Protocols Regarding Treatments for Coronavirus Disease 2019.

ABSTRACT:

Background

With the global spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), an increasing number of clinical trials are being designed and executed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of various therapies for COVID-19. We conducted this survey to assess the methodological quality of registry protocols on potential treatments for COVID-19.

Methods

Clinical trial protocols were identified on the ClinicalTrials.gov and the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry. Protocols were screened by two investigators independently against pre-defined eligibility criteria. Quality of the included protocols was assessed according to the modified 14-item SPIRIT (Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials) 2013 Statement.

Results

We included 82 randomized controlled trial (RCT) protocols investigating treatment modalities for COVID-19. These ongoing trials are being conducted in 16 provinces, autonomous regions, and municipalities of China, and study interventions were either Western medicines (n = 56) or traditional Chinese medicine (n = 26). Findings of our quality assessment indicated that the existing trial protocols could be further improved on several aspects, including selection and definition of outcome measures, descriptions of study interventions and comparators, study subject recruitment time, definition of study inclusion and exclusion criteria, and allocation concealment methods. Descriptions of random sequence generation methodologies were accurate for the majority of included trial protocols (n = 64; 78.05%); however, reporting of allocation concealment remained unclear in 63 (76.83%) protocols. Therefore, the overall risk of selection bias across these RCTs was judged to be unclear. A total of 52 (63.41%) included RCT protocols were open-label trials and are thus associated with a high risk of performance bias and detection bias.

Conclusion

Quality of currently available RCT protocols on the treatments for COVID-19 could be further improved. For transparency and effective knowledge translation in real-world clinically settings, it is important for trial investigators to standardize baseline treatments for patients with COVID-19 and assess clinically important core outcome measures. Despite eager anticipation from the public on the results of effectiveness trials in COVID-19, robust design, execution, and reporting of these trials should be regarded as high priority.

SUBMITTER: Zhang J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7481475 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveThis study aimed to assess the registration quality of clinical trials (CTs) with traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) in the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) and identify the common problems if any.MethodsThe ICTRP database was searched for all TCM CTs that were registered up to 31 December 2017. Registered information of each trial was collected from specific registry involved in ICTRP through hyperlink. The primary analysis was to assess the reporting quality of registered trials with TCM interventions, which is based on the minimum 20 items of WHO Trial Registration Data Set (TRDS, V.1.2.1) plus optional additional three items recommended by ICTRP, and some specific items for TCM information (including TCM intervention, diagnosis, outcome and rationale). Descriptive statistics were additionally used to analyse the baseline characteristics of TCM trial registrations.ResultsA total of 3339 records in 15 registries were examined. The number of TCM registered trials has increased rapidly after the requirement of mandatory trial registration proposed by International Committee of Medical Journal Editors on 1 July 2005, and the top two registries were Chinese Clinical Trial Registry and ClincialTrials.gov. Of 3339 trials, 61% were prospective registration and 12.8% shared resultant publications. There were 2955 interventional trials but none of them had a 100% reporting rate of the minimum 20 items and additional three items. The reporting quality of these 23 items was not optimal due to 11 of them had a lower reporting rate (<65%). For TCM details, 49.2% lacked information on description of TCM intervention(s), 85.9% did not contain TCM diagnosis criteria, 92.6% did not use TCM outcome(s) and 67.1% lacked information on TCM background and rationale.ConclusionThe registration quality of TCM CTs should be improved by prospective registration, full completion of WHO TRDS, full reporting of TCM information and results sharing. Further full set of trial registration items for TCM trials should be developed thus to standardise the content of TCM trial registration.

Project description:ImportanceChildren of all ages appear susceptible to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection. To support pediatric clinical studies for investigational treatments of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), pediatric-specific dosing is required.ObjectiveTo define pediatric-specific dosing regimens for hydroxychloroquine and remdesivir for COVID-19 treatment.Design, setting, and participantsPharmacokinetic modeling and simulation were used to extrapolate investigated adult dosages toward children (March 2020-April 2020). Physiologically based pharmacokinetic modeling was used to inform pediatric dosing for hydroxychloroquine. For remdesivir, pediatric dosages were derived using allometric-scaling with age-dependent exponents. Dosing simulations were conducted using simulated pediatric and adult participants based on the demographics of a white US population.InterventionsSimulated drug exposures following a 5-day course of hydroxychloroquine (400 mg every 12 hours × 2 doses followed by 200 mg every 12 hours × 8 doses) and a single 200-mg intravenous dose of remdesivir were computed for simulated adult participants. A simulation-based dose-ranging study was conducted in simulated children exploring different absolute and weight-normalized dosing strategies.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome for hydroxychloroquine was average unbound plasma concentrations for 5 treatment days. Additionally, unbound interstitial lung concentrations were simulated. For remdesivir, the primary outcome was plasma exposure (area under the curve, 0 to infinity) following single-dose administration.ResultsFor hydroxychloroquine, the physiologically based pharmacokinetic model analysis included 500 and 600 simulated white adult and pediatric participants, respectively, and supported weight-normalized dosing for children weighing less than 50 kg. Geometric mean-simulated average unbound plasma concentration values among children within different developmental age groups (32-35 ng/mL) were congruent to adults (32 ng/mL). Simulated unbound hydroxychloroquine concentrations in lung interstitial fluid mirrored those in unbound plasma and were notably lower than in vitro concentrations needed to mediate antiviral activity. For remdesivir, the analysis included 1000 and 6000 simulated adult and pediatric participants, respectively. The proposed pediatric dosing strategy supported weight-normalized dosing for participants weighing less than 60 kg. Geometric mean-simulated plasma area under the time curve 0 to infinity values among children within different developmental age-groups (4315-5027 ng × h/mL) were similar to adults (4398 ng × h/mL).Conclusions and relevanceThis analysis provides pediatric-specific dosing suggestions for hydroxychloroquine and remdesivir and raises concerns regarding hydroxychloroquine use for COVID-19 treatment because concentrations were less than those needed to mediate an antiviral effect.

Project description:BackgroundEarly in the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, there was minimal data to guide treatment, and we lacked understanding of how clinicians translated this limited evidence base for potential therapeutics to bedside care. Our objective was to systematically determine how emerging data about COVID-19 treatments was implemented by analyzing institutional treatment protocols.MethodsTreatment protocols from North American healthcare facilities and recommendations from guideline-issuing bodies were collected. Qualitative data on treatment regimens and their applications were extracted using an adapted National Institutes of Health/US Food and Drug Administration experimental therapeutics framework. Structured data on risk factor and severity of illness scoring systems were extracted and analyzed using descriptive statistics.ResultsWe extracted data from 105 independent protocols. Guideline-issuing organizations published recommendations after the initial peak of the pandemic in many regions and generally recommended clinical trial referral, with limited additional guidance. Facility-specific protocols favored offering some treatment (96.8%, N = 92 of 95), most commonly, hydroxychloroquine (90.5%), followed by remdesivir and interleukin-6 inhibitors. Recommendation for clinical trial enrollment was limited largely to academic medical centers (19 of 52 vs 9 of 43 community/Veterans Affairs [VA]), which were more likely to have access to research studies. Other themes identified included urgent protocol development, plans for rapid updates, contradictory statements, and entirely missing sections, with section headings but no content other than "in process."ConclusionsIn the COVID-19 pandemic, emerging information was rapidly implemented by institutions into clinical practice and, unlike recommendations from guideline-issuing bodies, heavily favored administering some form of therapy. Understanding how and why evidence is translated into clinical care is critical to improve processes for other emerging diseases.

Project description:Importance:Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 has caused a global outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 binds angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 of the rennin-angiotensin system, resulting in hypokalemia. Objective:To investigate the prevalence, causes, and clinical implications of hypokalemia, including its possible association with treatment outcomes, among patients with COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants:This cohort study was conducted at Wenzhou Central Hospital and Sixth People's Hospital of Wenzhou, Wenzhou, China, from January 11, 2020, to February 15, 2020. Participants included patients who received a diagnosis of COVID-19 according to the criteria issued by the Chinese Health Bureau and were admitted to the hospital. The patients were classified as having severe hypokalemia (plasma potassium <3 mmol/L), hypokalemia (plasma potassium 3-3.5 mmol/L), and normokalemia (plasma potassium >3.5 mmol/L). The clinical features, therapy, and outcomes were compared between the 3 groups. Data analysis was conducted in March 2020. Interventions:The patients were given general support and antiviral therapy. Their epidemiological and clinical features were collected. Main Outcomes and Measures:The prevalence of hypokalemia and response to treatment with potassium supplements were measured by analyzing plasma and urine potassium levels. Results:One hundred seventy-five patients (87 female patients [50%]; mean [SD] age, 45?[14] years) were classified as having severe hypokalemia (31 patients [18%]), hypokalemia (64 patients [37%]), and normokalemia (80 patients [46%]). Patients with severe hypokalemia had statistically significantly higher body temperature (mean [SD], 37.6 °C [0.9 °C]) than the patients with hypokalemia (mean [SD],?37.2 °C?[0.7 °C]; difference, 0.4 °C; 95% CI, 0.2-0.6 °C; P?=?.02) and the patients with normokalemia (mean [SD],?37.1 °C?[0.8 °C]; difference, 0.5 °C; 95% CI, 0.3-0.7 °C; P?=?.005). Patients with higher levels of hypokalemia also had higher creatine kinase levels (severe hypokalemia, mean [SD], 200?[257] U/L [median, 113 U/L; interquartile range {IQR}, 61-242 U/L]; hypokalemia, mean [SD], 97?[85] U/L; and normokalemia, mean [SD], 82?[57] U/L), higher creatine kinase-MB fraction (severe hypokalemia, mean [SD], 32?[39] U/L [median, 14 U/L; IQR, 11-36 U/L]; hypokalemia, mean [SD], 18?[15] U/L; and normokalemia, mean [SD], 15?[8] U/L), higher lactate dehydrogenase levels (mean [SD], severe hypokalemia, 256?[88] U/L; hypokalemia, 212?[59] U/L; and normokalemia, 199?[61] U/L), and higher C-reactive protein levels (severe hypokalemia, mean [SD], 29?[23] mg/L; hypokalemia, mean [SD], 18?[20] mg/L [median, 12, mg/L; IQR, 4-25 mg/L]; and normokalemia, mean [SD], 15?[18] mg/L [median, 6 U/L; IQR, 3-17 U/L]). Of 40 severely and critically ill patients, 34 (85%) had hypokalemia. Patients with severe hypokalemia were given potassium at a dose of 40 mEq per day, for a total mean (SD) of 453 (53) mEq potassium chloride, during the hospital stay. The patients responded well to potassium supplements as they recovered. Conclusions and Relevance:The correction of hypokalemia is challenging because of continuous renal potassium loss resulting from the degradation of angiotensin-converting enzyme 2. The high prevalence of hypokalemia among patients with COVID-19 suggests the presence of disordered rennin-angiotensin system activity, which increases as a result of reduced counteractivity of angiotensin-converting enzyme 2, which is bound by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2.