scholarly journals Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Non-COVID-19 Clinical Trials

2022 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 19
Author(s):  
Katia Audisio ◽  
Hillary Lia ◽  
Newell Bryce Robinson ◽  
Mohamed Rahouma ◽  
Giovanni Soletti ◽  
...  

Randomized controlled trials (RCT) were impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, but no systematic analysis has evaluated the overall impact of COVID-19 on non-COVID-19-related RCTs. The ClinicalTrials.gov database was queried in February 2020. Eligible studies included all randomized trials with a start date after 1 January 2010 and were active during the period from 1 January 2015 to 31 December 2020. The effect of the pandemic period on non-COVID-19 trials was determined by piece-wise regression models using 11 March 2020 as the start of the pandemic and by time series analysis (models fitted using 2015–2018 data and forecasted for 2019–2020). The study endpoints were early trial stoppage, normal trial completion, and trial activation. There were 161,377 non-COVID-19 trials analyzed. The number of active trials increased annually through 2019 but decreased in 2020. According to the piece-wise regression models, trial completion was not affected by the pandemic (p = 0.56) whereas trial stoppage increased (p = 0.001). There was a pronounced decrease in trial activation early during the pandemic (p < 0.001) which then recovered. The findings from the time series models were consistent comparing forecasted and observed results (trial completion p = 0.22; trial stoppage p < 0.01; trial activation, p = 0.01). During the pandemic, there was an increase in non-COVID-19 RCTs stoppage without changes in RCT completion. There was a sharp decline in new RCTs at the beginning of the pandemic, which later recovered.

2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
John P.A. Ioannidis

Importance. COVID-19 has resulted in massive production, publication and wide dissemination of clinical studies trying to identify effective treatments. However, several widely touted treatments failed to show effectiveness in large well-done randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Objective. To evaluate for COVID-19 treatments that showed no benefits in subsequent large RCTs how many of their most-cited clinical studies had declared favorable results for these interventions. Methods. Scopus (last update December 23, 2021) identified articles on lopinavir-ritonavir, hydroxycholoroquine/azithromycin, remdesivir, convalescent plasma, colchicine or interferon (index interventions) that represented clinical trials and that had received >150 citations. Their conclusions were assessed and correlated with study design features. The ten most recent citations for the most-cited article on each index intervention were examined on whether they were critical to the highly-cited study. Altmetric scores were also obtained. Findings. 40 articles of clinical studies on these index interventions had received >150 citations (7 exceeded 1,000 citations). 20/40 (50%) had favorable conclusions and 4 were equivocal. Highly-cited articles with favorable conclusions were rarely RCTs while those without favorable conclusions were mostly RCTs (3/20 vs 15/20, p=0.0003). Only 1 RCT with favorable conclusions had sample size >160. Citation counts correlated strongly with Altmetric scores, in particular news items. Only 9 (15%) of 60 recent citations to the most highly-cited studies with favorable or equivocal conclusions were critical to the highly-cited study. Conclusion. Many clinical studies with favorable conclusions for largely ineffective COVID-19 treatments are uncritically heavily cited and disseminated. Early observational studies and small randomized trials may cause spurious claims of effectiveness that get perpetuated.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Colacci ◽  
John Fralick ◽  
Ayodele Odutayo ◽  
Michael Fralick

Importance: The risk of diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) with sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors is unclear. Objective: To examine the risk of DKA with SGLT2 inhibitors in both observational studies and large clinical trials. Data Sources: Searches of PubMed, EMBASE and CENTRAL (inception to 15 April 2019) without language restrictions; conference proceedings; and reference lists. Study Selection: Randomized controlled trials and observational studies that quantified the rate of diabetic ketoacidosis with an SGLT2 inhibitor in comparison to another diabetes medication or placebo. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Two independent investigators abstracted study data and assessed the quality of evidence. Data were pooled using random effects models with the Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman method. Main Outcome and Measures: Absolute event rates and hazard ratios for diabetic ketoacidosis were extracted from each study. Results: Seven randomized trials encompassing 42,375 participants and five cohort studies encompassing 318,636 participants were selected. Among the 7 randomized controlled trials, the absolute rate of DKA among patients randomized to an SGLT2 inhibitor ranged from 0.6 to 2.2 events per 1000 person years. Four randomized trials were included in the meta-analysis, and compared to placebo or comparator medication, SGLT2 inhibitors had a 2.4-fold higher risk of DKA (Relative Risk [RR] = 2.46 [95% CI, 1.16-5.21]; I2 = 0%; P = 0.54). Among the 5 observational studies, the absolute rate of DKA associated with SGLT2 inhibitor use ranged from 0.6 to 4.9 per 1000 person years and a 1.7-fold higher rate of DKA compared to another diabetes medication (RR = 1.74 [95% CI, 1.01-2.93]; I2 = 45%; P = 0.12). Conclusions and Relevance: In adults with type 2 diabetes, SGLT2 inhibitors increase the risk of DKA in both observational studies and large randomized clinical trials. Registration: CRD42019146855 Funding Source: None


2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (5) ◽  
pp. 672-679 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leila Rooshenas ◽  
Sangeetha Paramasivan ◽  
Marcus Jepson ◽  
Jenny L. Donovan

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) can provide high quality evidence about the comparative effectiveness of health care interventions, but many RCTs struggle with or fail to complete recruitment. RCTs are built on the principles of the experimental method, but their planning, conduct, and interpretation can depend on complex social, behavioral, and cultural factors that may be best understood through qualitative research. Most qualitative studies undertaken alongside RCTs involve interviews that produce data that are used in a supportive or supplicatory role, but there is potential for qualitative research to be more influential. In this article, we describe the research methods underpinning the “QuinteT” (Qualitative Research Integrated Within Trials) approach to understand and address RCT recruitment difficulties. The QuinteT Recruitment Intervention (QRI) brings together multiple qualitative strategies and quantitative data and uses triangulation to understand recruitment issues rapidly. These nuanced understandings are used to inform the implementation of collaborative actions to improve recruitment.


2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 133-142 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shirlene Vianna Moreira ◽  
Francis Ricardo dos Reis Justi ◽  
Marcos Moreira

ABSTRACT Treatment with music has shown effectiveness in the treatment of general behavioural and cognitive symptoms of patients with various types of dementia. Objective: To assess the effectiveness of treatment with music on the memory of patients with Alzheimer’s disease (AD). Methods: A systematic search was performed on PubMed (Medline), Cochrane Library, PsycINFO and Lilacs databases up to June 2017 and included all randomized controlled trials that assessed memory using musical interventions in patients with AD. Results: Forty-two studies were identified, and 24 studies were selected. After applying the exclusion criteria, four studies involving 179 patients were included. These studies showed the benefits of using music to treat memory deficit in patients with AD. Conclusion: To the best of our knowledge, this is the first systematic review focusing on randomized trials found in the literature that analysed the role of musical interventions specifically in the memory of patients with AD. Despite the positive outcome of this review, the available evidence remains inconsistent due to the small number of randomized controlled trials.


2017 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 443-455 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arabella Ludemann ◽  
Emma Power ◽  
Tammy C. Hoffmann

Purpose To evaluate the completeness of intervention descriptions in recent randomized controlled trials of speech-language pathology treatments. Method A consecutive sample of entries on the speechBITE database yielded 129 articles and 162 interventions. Interventions were rated using the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist. Rating occurred at 3 stages: interventions as published in the primary article, secondary locations referred to by the article (e.g., protocol papers, websites), and contact with corresponding authors. Results No interventions were completely described in primary publications or after analyzing information from secondary locations. After information was added from correspondence with authors, a total of 28% of interventions was rated as complete. The intervention elements with the most information missing in the primary publications were tailoring and modification of interventions (in 25% and 13% of articles, respectively) and intervention materials and where they could be accessed (18%). Elements that were adequately described in most articles were intervention names (in 100% of articles); rationale (96%); and details of the frequency, session duration, and length of interventions (69%). Conclusions Clinicians and researchers are restricted in the usability of evidence from speech-language pathology randomized trials because of poor reporting of elements essential to the replication of interventions.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document