Characterisation of current pharmacotherapeutic COVID-19 clinical trials in India: A registry-based descriptive analysis

COVID-19 has emerged as a global pandemic. There is currently a spurt of clinical research to generate evidence to treat this novel disease. The aim of the current study is to characterise the pharmacotherapeutic intervention-related clinical trials registered in India. COVID-19 clinical trials registered in India were analysed from data retrieved from Clinical Trial Registry-India, ClinicalTrials.gov and International Clinical Trial Registry Platform. Parameters such as study design, sample size, pharmacotherapeutic interventions and primary outcomes were evaluated. A total of 267 studies were screened among which 103 clinical trials were assessed for descriptive analysis. Majority of registered trials (55.3%) were in Indian System of Medicine followed by antimalarials such as hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine (10.5%) and plasma therapy (7.1%). Most commonly used study design was randomised parallel group in 63%. Open-label study was seen in 47.5%. Primary outcome was improvement of clinical symptoms in 46.6% followed by rate and time of viral load reduction in 18.2%. Maharashtra (n = 35) followed by Delhi (n = 29) had the maximum number of registered trial sites. The study gives broad perspective on the current trend of clinical trials on COVID-19 being conducted in India. The outcomes of these trials will lead to generation of valuable data for evidence-based treatment of COVID-19.

Download Full-text

Advance of Novel Coronavirus Registration Clinical Trial

10.1101/2020.03.16.20034934 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Gao Song ◽

Meng Qun Cheng ◽

Xian Wen Wei

Keyword(s):

Clinical Trial ◽

Clinical Trials ◽

Treatment Options ◽

Descriptive Analysis ◽

Clinical Trial Registry ◽

Chi Square ◽

Plasma Therapy ◽

Study Duration ◽

Design Characteristics ◽

Novel Coronavirus

AbstractBackgroundTo analyze the characteristics and heterogeneity of clinical trials of Novel Coronavirus(COVID-19) registered in the China Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR), and provide data bases and information references for clinical treatmentMethodsStatistics of COVID-19 clinical trials registered with ChiCTR as of February 24, 2020 were collected. Descriptive analysis of registration characteristics. The chi-square test is used to compare statistical differences between different study types, intervention methods, study stage, and Primary sponsor.Results232 COVID-19 studies registered at the ChiCTR were collected. The overall number of COVID-19 registrations was increased. Hubei Province, China has the largest number of registrations. There were significant differences between the number of participants(P=0.000), study duration(P=0.008), study assignment(P=0.000), and blind method(P=0.000) for different study types. Significant differences could be seen in the dimensions of multicenter study(P=0.022), of participants numbe(P=0.000), study duration(P=0.000) and study assignment(P=0.001) for the four intervention methods. There were significant differences in study assignment(P=0.043) between the early and late studies. CMT drugs with high research frequency are chloroquine, lopinavir / ritonavir, and I-IFN; BI was Cell therapy, plasma therapy, Thymosin, and M/P-AB.ConclusionsDifferent study design characteristics have led to significant differences in some aspects of the COVID-19 clinical trial. Timely summary analysis can provide more treatment options and evidence for clinical practice.

Download Full-text

Chinese Clinical Studies for Pharmacological Treatments of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)

10.20944/preprints202004.0279.v1 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Ru Han ◽

Yitong Wang ◽

Monique Dabbous ◽

Shuyao Liang ◽

Tingting Qiu ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Clinical Trial ◽

Clinical Trials ◽

Clinical Studies ◽

Observational Studies ◽

Reference Group ◽

Descriptive Analysis ◽

Secondary Analysis ◽

Trial Registry ◽

Primary Analysis ◽

Clinical Trial Registry

Objectives: This study aims to identify, report, and analyze registered and published clinical trials and observational studies for the pharmacological treatment of COVID-19 conducted in China. Methods: A strategic search was conducted via the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry to identify and extract clinical trials and observational studies registered and conducted in China for the pharmacological treatment of COVID-2019 between January 1st, 2020 and March 21st, 2020. This was further supplemented by searches conducted via the China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) database, the MEDLINE database, the World Health Organization (WHO) database, and MedRxiv and BioRxiv electronic platforms for preprint articles, published up until April 8th, 2020. Studies available in Chinese and English were included in the searches and extracted. A primary descriptive analysis was performed for registered clinical trials and observational studies identified in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry based on the extraction of the following clinical study information: trial ID, planned date of enrollment, recruitment status, study design, population, sample size, intervention/exposure group, control /reference group, dosage, and primary outcomes. A secondary descriptive analysis was performed for published clinical trials and observational studies identified from the supplementary databases based on the extraction of the following published clinical study information: study design, population, intervention/exposure group, control /reference group and main results as appropriate. Results: A total of 221 clinical trials and observational studies were included from all databases searched. From the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, 195 registered clinical studies including 170 clinical trials and 25 observational studies were identified and included for primary analysis. From the supplementary databases, 26 published clinical studies including 8 clinical trials and 18 observational studies were included for secondary analysis. Of these 26 published clinical studies, 18 studies, including 3 clinical trials and 15 observational studies were identified from CNKI, 2 studies including 1 clinical trial and 1 observational study from MEDLINE, 2 including 1 clinical trials and 1 observational studies from the WHO database, and 4 including 3 clinical trials and 1 observational studies from MedRxiv and BioRxiv platforms. In the primary analysis, among the 170 clinical trials included from the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, 101 investigated western medicines (WMs), while 15 investigated Traditional Chinese Medicines (TCMs), and 54 investigated a combination of TCMs and WMs. Among the 25 included observational studies from the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, 2 investigated WMs, 2 investigated TCMs, and 21 investigated a combination of TCMs and WMs. The total number of exposed patients in all 195 clinical studies from the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry amounted to 24,500. In the secondary analysis, treatment with Lopinavir-ritonavir and treatment with Hydroxychloroquine was not associated with a difference from standard of care in the rate of RT-PCR negativity; treatment with a combination of Lopinavir-ritonavir, interferon α, and Lian-Hua-Qing-Wen capsule was found to significantly improve the effective rate of treatment compared with Interferon α combined with Lian-Hua-Qing-Wen capsule. Conclusions: China is generating a massive source of evidence that is critical for defeating the COVID-19 pandemic. Not only the clinical experience, but also the scientific evidence should be shared with the global scientific community.

Download Full-text