scholarly journals COVID-19 Pandemic and Trends in Clinical Trials: A Multi-Region and Global Perspective

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Satoshi Nishiwaki ◽  
Yuichi Ando
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Negative Correlation ◽  
Clinical Development ◽  
Global Perspective ◽  
Percentage Change ◽  
European Medicines Agency ◽  
Press Releases ◽  
Percentage Decrease ◽  
New Drug ◽  
The Mean

To evaluate the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on clinical development, the number of newly started clinical trials in each geographical region between January 2018 and December 2020 were calculated based on data from the ClinicalTrials.gov database. Data regarding new drug applications were obtained from European Medicines Agency monthly reports, pharmaceutical company press releases, and the archives of the Drugs.com database. The mean percentage change in newly started clinical trials for diseases other than COVID-19 between each month in 2019 and the corresponding month in 2020 was −7.5%, with the maximum of −57.3% observed between April 2019 and April 2020. Similarly, the mean percentage change of reported results for each month in 2019 and 2020 was −5.1%, with the maximum of −27.4% observed in July 2020. The activity of clinical trials was decreased as the number of COVID-19 patients was increased, and a statistically negative correlation was observed between the prevalence of COVID-19 and the percentage decrease in the number of clinical trials stared or reported results. As for new drug submissions, decreases were observed in the latter half of 2020 compared with the same period during the previous year, for each indicator. A considerable decline in non-COVID-19 activity for all indicators regarding clinical developments was suggested during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. It is important to recognize the situation and continue to make efforts to conduct clinical trials for both COVID-19 and no-COVID-19 for new medical developments in the future.

scholarly journals Adaptive design clinical trials: a review of the literature and ClinicalTrials.gov

BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. e018320 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura E Bothwell ◽  
Jerry Avorn ◽  
Nazleen F Khan ◽  
Aaron S Kesselheim
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Phase I ◽  
Interim Analysis ◽  
Adaptive Design ◽  
Drug Application ◽  
Adaptive Designs ◽  
European Medicines Agency ◽  
Product Approval ◽  
New Drug ◽  
Adaptive Trials

ObjectivesThis review investigates characteristics of implemented adaptive design clinical trials and provides examples of regulatory experience with such trials.DesignReview of adaptive design clinical trials in EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane Registry of Controlled Clinical Trials, Web of Science and ClinicalTrials.gov. Phase I and seamless Phase I/II trials were excluded. Variables extracted from trials included basic study characteristics, adaptive design features, size and use of independent data monitoring committees (DMCs) and blinded interim analyses. We also examined use of the adaptive trials in new drug submissions to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European Medicines Agency (EMA) and recorded regulators’ experiences with adaptive designs.Results142 studies met inclusion criteria. There has been a recent growth in publicly reported use of adaptive designs among researchers around the world. The most frequently appearing types of adaptations were seamless Phase II/III (57%), group sequential (21%), biomarker adaptive (20%), and adaptive dose-finding designs (16%). About one-third (32%) of trials reported an independent DMC, while 6% reported blinded interim analysis. We found that 9% of adaptive trials were used for FDA product approval consideration, and 12% were used for EMA product approval consideration. International regulators had mixed experiences with adaptive trials. Many product applications with adaptive trials had extensive correspondence between drug sponsors and regulators regarding the adaptive designs, in some cases with regulators requiring revisions or alterations to research designs.ConclusionsWider use of adaptive designs will necessitate new drug application sponsors to engage with regulatory scientists during planning and conduct of the trials. Investigators need to more consistently report protections intended to preserve confidentiality and minimise potential operational bias during interim analysis.

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASES AND ANATOMOSIS OF ARTERIOVENOUS FISTULAR IN PATIENTS WITH REGULARLY HEMODIALYSIS

2017 ◽  
pp. 88-92
Author(s):  
Van Hien Pham ◽  
Huu Vu Quang Nguyen ◽  
Tam Vo
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Blood Pressure ◽  
Renal Failure ◽  
Chronic Renal Failure ◽  
Cardiovascular Diseases ◽  
Systolic Blood Pressure ◽  
Diastolic Blood Pressure ◽  
Negative Correlation ◽  
Mean Value ◽  
The Mean

Background: Cardiovascular diseases are the leading cause of death in patients with chronic renal failure. When a patient undergoes dialysis, making AVF or AVG causes cardiovascular events. Understanding the relationship between complications: hypertension, heart failure, AVF or AVG (formation time, position, diameter) helps us monitor, detect, prevent and treatment of complications to limit the risk of death in patients with dialysis. Objective: Relationship between cardiovascular diseases and anatomosis of arteriovenous fistular in patients with regularly hemodialysis at Cho Ray Hospital. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted at Cho Ray Hospital from 2015 to 2016. The survey some cardiovascular diseases are done by clinical examination, tests for diagnostic imaging such as X-ray, electrocardiogram and echocardiogram: heart and diameter of anastomosis AVF, AVG. Results: The study population included 303 patients with chronic renal failure who were dialysis. Of which, patients aged 25-45 accounted for the highest proportion (43.9%). The proportion of male and female patients was similar (48.5% and 51.5% respectively). The mean value of systolic blood pressure on patients made AVF, AVG less than 12 months is higher than patients made AVF, AVG over 12 months, and there is negative correlation (r = -0.43) between AVF, AVG and systolic blood pressure (p <0.05). The mean value of diastolic blood pressure on patients made AVF, AVG less than 12 months is lower than patients made AVF, AVG over 12 months, and and there is positive correlation (r = -0.43) between AVF, AVG and diastolic blood pressure (p <0.05) (p <0.05). The prevalence of patients with heart failure made AVF, AVG over 12 months is higher than that of the under 12 months group, there is a negative correlation (r = - 0.43) between AVF, AVG diameter and EF index (p <0.05). Conclusion: It is important to note the diameter of anastomosis AVF, AVG in patients with chronic renal failure dialysis to limit cardiovascular complications, especially heart failure. Key words: Chronic kidney disease, hemodialysis.

Clinical Drug Development for the Treatment of Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension: Collaboration With the Pharmaceutical Industry and Regulatory Agencies

2010 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 214-219
Author(s):  
Robyn J. Barst
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension ◽  
Drug Development ◽  
Phase 1 ◽  
Preclinical Studies ◽  
Phase 2 ◽  
Phase 3 ◽  
Preclinical Testing ◽  
New Drug ◽  
Pulmonary Arterial

Drug development is the entire process of introducing a new drug to the market. It involves drug discovery, screening, preclinical testing, an Investigational New Drug (IND) application in the US or a Clinical Trial Application (CTA) in the EU, phase 1–3 clinical trials, a New Drug Application (NDA), Food and Drug Administration (FDA) review and approval, and postapproval studies required for continuing safety evaluation. Preclinical testing assesses safety and biologic activity, phase 1 determines safety and dosage, phase 2 evaluates efficacy and side effects, and phase 3 confirms efficacy and monitors adverse effects in a larger number of patients. Postapproval studies provide additional postmarketing data. On average, it takes 15 years from preclinical studies to regulatory approval by the FDA: about 3.5–6.5 years for preclinical, 1–1.5 years for phase 1, 2 years for phase 2, 3–3.5 years for phase 3, and 1.5–2.5 years for filing the NDA and completing the FDA review process. Of approximately 5000 compounds evaluated in preclinical studies, about 5 compounds enter clinical trials, and 1 compound is approved (Tufts Center for the Study of Drug Development, 2011). Most drug development programs include approximately 35–40 phase 1 studies, 15 phase 2 studies, and 3–5 pivotal trials with more than 5000 patients enrolled. Thus, to produce safe and effective drugs in a regulated environment is a highly complex process. Against this backdrop, what is the best way to develop drugs for pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH), an orphan disease often rapidly fatal within several years of diagnosis and in which spontaneous regression does not occur?

New Anti-VEGF Drugs in Ophthalmology

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (12) ◽  
pp. 1194-1200
Author(s):  
Claudio Campa
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Delivery System ◽  
Clinical Development ◽  
Advanced Stage ◽  
Phase 3 ◽  
Anti Vegf

: This review focuses on 5 new anti-VEGF drugs in the advanced stage of clinical development (i.e., phase 3): conbercept, brolucizumab, port delivery system with ranibizumab, abicipar pegol and faricimab. : Results of clinical trials and the advantages of each drug compared to the available molecules are discussed in detail.

scholarly journals P170 The validity and utility of the SLE-key® rule-out serological test when applied in a selected cohort of patients with SLE and other connective tissue diseases

Rheumatology ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 60 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sheilla Achieng ◽  
John A Reynolds ◽  
Ian N Bruce ◽  
Marwan Bukhari
Keyword(s):  
Linear Regression ◽  
Connective Tissue ◽  
Connective Tissue Disease ◽  
Negative Correlation ◽  
Connective Tissue Diseases ◽  
Inflammatory Myositis ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Negative Rule ◽  
Spearman’S Correlation ◽  
Rule Out

Abstract Background/Aims  We aimed to establish the validity of the SLE-key® rule-out test and analyse its utility in distinguishing systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) from other autoimmune rheumatic connective tissue diseases. Methods  We used data from the Lupus Extended Autoimmune Phenotype (LEAP) study, which included a representative cross-sectional sample of patients with a variety of rheumatic connective tissue diseases, including SLE, mixed connective tissue disease (MCTD), inflammatory myositis, systemic sclerosis, primary Sjögren’s syndrome and undifferentiated connective tissue disease (UCTD). The modified 1997 ACR criteria were used to classify patients with SLE. Banked serum samples were sent to Immune-Array’s CLIA- certified laboratory Veracis (Richmond, VA) for testing. Patients were assigned test scores between 0 and 1 where a score of 0 was considered a negative rule-out test (i.e. SLE cannot be excluded) whilst a score of 1 was assigned for a positive rule-out test (i.e. SLE excluded). Performance measures were used to assess the test’s validity and measures of association determined using linear regression and Spearman’s correlation. Results  Our study included a total of 155 patients of whom 66 had SLE. The mean age in the SLE group was 44.2 years (SD 13.04). 146 patients (94.1%) were female. 84 (54.2%) patients from the entire cohort had ACR SLE scores of ≤ 3 whilst 71 (45.8%) had ACR SLE scores ≥ 4. The mean ACR SLE total score for the SLE patients was 4.85 (SD 1.67), ranging from 2 to 8, with mean disease duration of 12.9 years. The Sensitivity of the SLE-Key® Rule-Out test in diagnosing SLE from other connective tissue diseases was 54.5%, specificity was 44.9%, PPV 42.4% and NPV 57.1 %. 45% of the SLE patients had a positive rule-out test. SLE could not be ruled out in 73% of the MCTD patients whilst 51% of the UCTD patients had a positive Rule-Out test and &gt;85% of the inflammatory myositis patients had a negative rule-out test. ROC analysis generated an AUC of 0.525 illustrating weak class separation capacity. Linear regression established a negative correlation between the SLE-key Rule-Out score and ACR SLE total scores. Spearman’s correlation was run to determine the relationship between ACR SLE total scores and SLE-key rule-out score and showed very weak negative correlation (rs = -0.0815, n = 155, p = 0.313). Conclusion  Our findings demonstrate that when applied in clinical practice in a rheumatology CTD clinic setting, the SLE-key® rule-out test does not accurately distinguish SLE from other CTDs. The development of a robust test that could achieve this would be pivotal. It is however important to highlight that the test was designed to distinguish healthy subjects from SLE patients and not for the purpose of differentiating SLE from other connective tissue diseases. Disclosure  S. Achieng: None. J.A. Reynolds: None. I.N. Bruce: Other; I.N.B is a National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Senior Investigator and is funded by the NIHR Manchester Biomedical Research Centre. M. Bukhari: None.

scholarly journals Genotype characterization and delayed loss of ambulation by glucocorticoids in a large cohort of patients with Duchenne muscular dystrophy

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Shu Zhang ◽  
◽  
Dongdong Qin ◽  
Liwen Wu ◽  
Man Li ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy ◽  
Muscular Dystrophy ◽  
Hazard Ratio ◽  
Large Cohort ◽  
Muscle Disease ◽  
Clinical Progression ◽  
Large Deletions ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Lower Hazard

Abstract Background Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) is the most common genetic muscle disease in human. We aimed to describe the genotype distribution in a large cohort of Chinese DMD patients and their delayed loss of ambulation by glucocorticoid (GC) treatments. This is to facilitate protocol designs and outcome measures for the emerging DMD clinical trials. Results A total of 1163 patients with DMD were recruited and genotyped. Genotype variations were categorized as large deletions, large duplications, and small mutations. Large deletions were further analyzed for those amenable to exon-skipping therapies. Participants aged 5 years or older were grouped into GC-treated and GC-naïve groups. Clinical progression among different genotypes and their responses to GC treatments were measured by age at loss of ambulation (LOA). Among the mutation genotypes, large deletions, large duplications, and small mutations accounted for 68.79%, 7.14%, and 24.07%, respectively. The mean age at diagnosis was 4.59 years; the median ages at LOA for the GC-naïve, prednisone/prednisolone-treated, and deflazacort-treated groups were 10.23, 12.02, and 13.95 years, respectively. The “deletion amenable to skipping exon 44” subgroup and the nonsense-mutation subgroup had older ages at LOA than the “other deletions” subgroup. Subgroups were further analyzed by both genotypes and GC status. All genotypes showed significant beneficial responses to GC treatment. Deletions amenable to skipping exon 44 showed a lower hazard ratio (0.155). The mean age at death was 18.57 years in this DMD group. Conclusion Genotype variation influences clinical progression in certain DMD groups. Beneficial responses to GC treatment were observed among all DMD genotypes. Compared with other genotypes, deletions amenable to skipping exon 44 had a lower hazard ratio, which may indicate a stronger protective effect of GC treatments on this subgroup. These data are valuable for designing future clinical trials, as clinical outcomes may be influenced by the genotypes.

scholarly journals Reporting of harms in oncological clinical study reports submitted to the European Medicines Agency compared to trial registries and publications—a methodological review

BMC Medicine ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Asger S. Paludan-Müller ◽  
Perrine Créquit ◽  
Isabelle Boutron
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Clinical Study ◽  
Primary Source ◽  
European Medicines Agency ◽  
Clinical Trial Registries ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Journal Publications ◽  
Clinical Study Reports ◽  
Completeness Of Reporting

Abstract Background An accurate and comprehensive assessment of harms is a fundamental part of an accurate weighing of benefits and harms of an intervention when making treatment decisions; however, harms are known to be underreported in journal publications. Therefore, we sought to compare the completeness of reporting of harm data, discrepancies in harm data reported, and the delay to access results of oncological clinical trials between three sources: clinical study reports (CSRs), clinical trial registries and journal publications. Methods We used the EMA clinical data website to identify all trials submitted to the EMA between 2015 and 2018. We retrieved all CSRs and included all phase II, II/III or III randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing targeted therapy and immunotherapy for cancer. We then identified related records in clinical trial registries and journals. We extracted harms data for eight pre-specified variables and determined the completeness of reporting of harm data in each of the three sources. Results We identified 42 RCTs evaluating 13 different drugs. Results were available on the EMA website in CSRs for 37 (88%) RCTs, ClinicalTrials.gov for 36 (86%), the European Clinical Trials Register (EUCTR) for 20 (48%) and in journal publications for 32 (76%). Harms reporting was more complete in CSRs than other sources. We identified marked discrepancies in harms data between sources, e.g. the number of patients discontinuing due to adverse events differed in CSRs and clinical trial registers for 88% of trials with data in both sources. For CSRs and publications, the corresponding number was 90%. The median (interquartile range) delay between the primary trial completion date and access to results was 4.34 (3.09–7.22) years for CSRs, 2.94 (1.16–4.52) years for ClinicalTrials.gov, 5.39 (4.18–7.33) years for EUCTR and 2.15 (0.64–5.04) years for publications. Conclusions Harms of recently approved oncological drugs were reported more frequently and in more detail in CSRs than in trial registries and journal publications. Systematic reviews seeking to address harms of oncological treatments should ideally use CSRs as the primary source of data; however, due to problems with access, this is currently not feasible.

scholarly journals Impact on actual clinical practice of the latest evidence for percutaneous closure of patent foramen ovale associated with stroke. A single center experience

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
L Carnero Montoro ◽  
M Ruiz Ortiz ◽  
N Paredes Hurtado ◽  
M Delgado Ortega ◽  
A Rodriguez Almodovar ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Patent Foramen Ovale ◽  
Cryptogenic Stroke ◽  
Percutaneous Closure ◽  
Publication Date ◽  
Foramen Ovale ◽  
Complex Anatomy ◽  
The Mean ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: None. Background and aims Since september 14th, 2017. Three large clinical trials demonstrated that, in selected patients, percutaneous closure of patent foramen ovale (PFO) was associated with lower recurrence in patients with cryptogenic stroke (CS). Our aim was to determine the impact of these findings on routine  clinical practice in a tertiary hospital. Methods Patients with percutaneous closure of PFO due to CS (January 2001-January 2020) were included. The clinical characteristics were analyzed individually and grouped in the RoPE score, before and after the publication date. Complex anatomy (CA) defined as interatrial septum aneurysm or basal wide bubble passage was evaluated in both periods. Results 293 patients were included. The mean age was 49 ± 11 years, 15% were older than 60 years, 60% men, 26% hypertensive, 28% smokers and 7%diabetics. The median RoPEscore was 6 [p25-75, 5-7] and 75% met CA criteria. Since september 14th, 2017, the frequency of CA and the mean age of the patients were significantly higher (89% vs. 69% p &lt;0.0005 and 51 ± 11 vs. 48 ± 11 years, p = 0.02, respectively), and RoPEscore, significantly lower (5 [5-7] vs. 6 [5-7], p = 0.02). Conclusion The publication of clinical trials wich demonstrated the benefit of percutaneous closure of PFO in CS had a significant impact on the daily clinical practice of our institution, with an increase in indications for CA, despite a clinical profile suggestive of lower causal probability of PFO.

scholarly journals WEE1 Inhibitor: Clinical Development

2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (9) ◽  
Author(s):  
Anthony Kong ◽  
Hisham Mehanna
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Tp53 Mutation ◽  
Predictive Biomarker ◽  
Concurrent Chemotherapy ◽  
Clinical Development ◽  
Novel Agents ◽  
The Novel ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Chemotherapy Agents

Abstract Purpose of Review WEE1 inhibitor has been shown to potential chemotherapy or radiotherapy sensitivity in preclinical models, particularly in p53-mutated or deficient cancer cells although not exclusively. Here, we review the clinical development of WEE1 inhibitor in combination with chemotherapy or radiotherapy with concurrent chemotherapy as well as its combination with different novel agents. Recent Findings Although several clinical trials have shown that WEE1 inhibitor can be safely combined with different chemotherapy agents as well as radiotherapy with concurrent chemotherapy, its clinical development has been hampered by the higher rate of grade 3 toxicities when added to standard treatments. A few clinical trials had also been conducted to test WEE1 inhibitor using TP53 mutation as a predictive biomarker. However, TP53 mutation has not been shown to be the most reliable predictive biomarker and the benefit of adding WEE1 inhibitor to chemotherapy has been modest, even in TP53 biomarker-driven studies. Summary There are ongoing clinical trials testing WEE1 inhibitor with novel agents such as ATR and PAPR inhibitors as well as anti-PDL1 immunotherapy, which may better define the role of WEE1 inhibitor in the future if any of the novel treatment combination will show superior anti-tumor efficacy with a good safety profile compared to monotherapy and/or standard treatment.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document