Dataset Information

Gender differences in clinical registration trials: is there a real problem?

ABSTRACT: Several studies have reported the under-representation of women in clinical trials, thereby challenging the external validity of the benefit/risk assessments of launched drugs. Our aim was to determine the extent to which women have been included in clinical trials used for drug registration and to analyse the fraction of women participating in phases I, II and III.We conducted cross-sectional, structured research into publicly available registration dossiers of Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved drugs that are prescribed frequently. Furthermore, we analysed compounds with high hepatic clearance and a known gender-related difference in drug response. In a sensitivity analysis, we compared figures with US disease prevalence data.For 38 of the initial 137 drugs (28%), sufficient data were reported and publicly available. For these drugs, 185?479 trial participants were included, of whom 47% were female and 44% were male; gender was not reported for 9% of participants. However, the number of female participants varied with the phase of the trial, with 22% females in phase I trials vs. 48% and 49%, respectively, in phase II and III trials. When compared with US disease prevalence data, 10 drugs (26%) had a greater than 20% difference between the proportion of females affected with the disease compared with representation in clinical trials.From these publicly available data, there was no evidence of any systematic under-representation of women in clinical trials.

SUBMITTER: Labots G

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5867082 | biostudies-other | 2018 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Gender differences in clinical registration trials: is there a real problem?

Labots Geert G Jones Aubrey A de Visser Saco J SJ Rissmann Robert R Burggraaf Jacobus J

British journal of clinical pharmacology 20180212 4

<h4>Aims</h4>Several studies have reported the under-representation of women in clinical trials, thereby challenging the external validity of the benefit/risk assessments of launched drugs. Our aim was to determine the extent to which women have been included in clinical trials used for drug registration and to analyse the fraction of women participating in phases I, II and III.<h4>Methods</h4>We conducted cross-sectional, structured research into publicly available registration dossiers of Food ...[more]

PMID: 29293280

Similar Datasets

Project description:Objective: Clinical trials are the most effective method for evaluating therapeutic strategies. The purpose of this study was to comprehensively assess the characteristics of trials on lupus nephritis (LN) and provide a reference for LN treatment and research. Methods: Registered therapeutic trials on drug interventions for LN were obtained from ClinicalTrials.gov up to December 3, 2020. The general characteristics, methodological characteristics, detailed characteristics, investigated drugs, eligibility criteria, and outcome measures of these trials were analyzed. Results: A total of 126 eligible trials were evaluated, and these trials mainly investigated the initial treatment of adult proliferative LN. Half of the trials enrolled <50 participants, and 70.7% of the trials lasted for 6-24 months. In total, 95.2% of trials adopted an interventional study design. Of intervention trials, 56.6% were in phase 2 or phase 3, 76.7% were randomized, 77.5% employed a parallel assignment, and 41.7% were masked. The eligibility criteria and outcome measures of the included trials varied and involved a variety of indicators. Chemical agents and biologics are the most widely studied immunotherapies, of which mycophenolate mofetil, tacrolimus, and rituximab are the most studied. In addition, some trials studied cell transplantation treatment. Conclusions: The majority of clinical trials for LN therapy registered on ClinicalTrials.gov investigated the initial treatment of adult proliferative LN, and most of these trials were randomized, parallel assigned, and insufficiently masked interventional trials with small scale, short duration, various eligibility criteria, and outcome measures. We hope that more large-scale, long-term multicenter, and high-quality RCT trials with standardized inclusion criteria/exclusion criteria and treatment effect evaluation systems will be conducted and that more energy and funding will be put into exploring biological products and stem cell therapies. In addition, trials for membranous LN, childhood-onset LN, and maintenance phase LN are needed to establish optimal treatment strategies.

Project description:BACKGROUND:There is a remarkable lack of detailed knowledge on pain areas in axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA), and their clinical relevance is largely unknown. Pain area may reflect local disease processes, but amplification of nervous system signalling may alter this relationship. Also, gender differences in pain area may exist in axSpA, possibly confounding disease activity outcomes. Therefore, we firstly detailed pain locations in axSpA and evaluated gender differences. Secondly, we explored the relationship of regional pain definitions with clinical outcomes. Finally, we explored the role of pain area in the assessment of disease activity. METHODS:Body charts informed on the presence of axial, peripheral articular and non-articular pain in 170 patients (108 men, 62 women) with axSpA. Multivariate Odds Ratios (ORs) were used to compare genders. General linear models were used to explore clinical differences in disease activity (Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index [BASDAI]), activity limitations (Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index [BASFI]), fear of movement (Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia 11-item version [TSK-11]), anxiety (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale subscale anxiety [HADS-A]) and depression (HADS subscale depression [HADS-D]) between four subgroups classified by widespread non-articular pain (WNAP+/-) and physician global assessment of disease activity (PGDA+/-) (p?<?.05). Principal Component Analysis (PCA) was performed to explore gender differences in the structure of disease activity. RESULTS:Axial thoracic pain was least prevalent (lumbar, 74.4%; cervical, 47.6%; cervicothoracic, 47.6%; thoracic, 32.4%), but it was about three times more likely in women (OR, 2.92; p?=?.009). Axial cervicothoracic junction pain spread more diffusely in women (OR, 2.48; p?=?.018). Women exhibited a two- to threefold increased likelihood of widespread axial (OR, 3.33; p?=?.007) and peripheral articular (OR, 2.34; p?=?.023) pain. A subgroup of WNAP+/PGDA- combined with low PGDA (27% of all patients) was associated with worse BASFI, BASDAI, HADS-A and HADS-D in men and worse TSK-11 and HADS-A in women (p?<?.05). Disease activity outcomes showed a two-factor structure in women but not in men. CONCLUSIONS:In patients with axSpA, the location and spread of pain was different between genders and was related to worse clinical status. On the basis of pain area and PGDA, clinical subgroups exhibiting a remarkably distinct health status were identified. Outcome instruments such as BASDAI should acknowledge gender differences to ensure structural validity.

Dataset Information

Gender differences in clinical registration trials: is there a real problem?

Publications

Gender differences in clinical registration trials: is there a real problem?

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure