Florence T Bourgeois1,2,3, Liat Orenstein3, Sarita Ballakur4, Kenneth D Mandl1,2,3, John P A Ioannidis5,6. 1. Division of Emergency Medicine, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts. 2. Department of Pediatrics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts. 3. Computational Health Informatics Program, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts. 4. Faculty of Arts and Sciences, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island. 5. Stanford Prevention Research Center, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, California. 6. Department of Health Research and Policy, School of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, California.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To measure exclusion of elderly adults from randomized trials studying drug interventions for ischemic heart disease (IHD) and describe the characteristics of these trials. DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis. SETTING: Interventional clinical trials studying a drug intervention for IHD that started in 2006 and after were identified in ClinicalTrials.gov. Data were extracted on study features, including age-based inclusion criteria. Data on participants and their age distribution were collected from trial publications, investigator inquiry, and result data in ClinicalTrials.gov. PARTICIPANTS: Individuals aged 65 and older. MEASUREMENTS: Proportion of trials excluding individuals based on age, mean age of trial participants, and proportion of enrolled participants aged 65 and older and 75 and older. RESULTS: Of 839 identified trials, 446 (53%) explicitly excluded elderly adults. The most-frequent upper age limits were 80 (n = 164) and 75 (n = 114), with a median upper age limit of 80 (interquartile range 75-80). Trials with upper age limit exclusions tended to be smaller (median number of participants 100 vs 201, P < .001) and were more likely to be funded primarily by nonindustry sources (78.3% vs 70.0%, P = .006). The overall mean age of trial participants was 62.7 (mean maximum age 74). The estimated proportion of participants aged 65 and older was 42.5% and the estimated proportion aged 75 and older was 12.3%. CONCLUSION: Despite the high burden of IHD in elderly adults, the majority of drug trials do not enroll participants reflective of age-related prevalence of the disease.
OBJECTIVES: To measure exclusion of elderly adults from randomized trials studying drug interventions for ischemic heart disease (IHD) and describe the characteristics of these trials. DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis. SETTING: Interventional clinical trials studying a drug intervention for IHD that started in 2006 and after were identified in ClinicalTrials.gov. Data were extracted on study features, including age-based inclusion criteria. Data on participants and their age distribution were collected from trial publications, investigator inquiry, and result data in ClinicalTrials.gov. PARTICIPANTS: Individuals aged 65 and older. MEASUREMENTS: Proportion of trials excluding individuals based on age, mean age of trial participants, and proportion of enrolled participants aged 65 and older and 75 and older. RESULTS: Of 839 identified trials, 446 (53%) explicitly excluded elderly adults. The most-frequent upper age limits were 80 (n = 164) and 75 (n = 114), with a median upper age limit of 80 (interquartile range 75-80). Trials with upper age limit exclusions tended to be smaller (median number of participants 100 vs 201, P < .001) and were more likely to be funded primarily by nonindustry sources (78.3% vs 70.0%, P = .006). The overall mean age of trial participants was 62.7 (mean maximum age 74). The estimated proportion of participants aged 65 and older was 42.5% and the estimated proportion aged 75 and older was 12.3%. CONCLUSION: Despite the high burden of IHD in elderly adults, the majority of drug trials do not enroll participants reflective of age-related prevalence of the disease.
Authors: Margaret Jean Hall; Carol J DeFrances; Sonja N Williams; Aleksandr Golosinskiy; Alexander Schwartzman Journal: Natl Health Stat Report Date: 2010-10-26
Authors: Muhammad Rizwan Sardar; Marwan Badri; Catherine T Prince; Jonathan Seltzer; Peter R Kowey Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2014-11 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: D Crivellari; M Bonetti; M Castiglione-Gertsch; R D Gelber; C M Rudenstam; B Thürlimann; K N Price; A S Coates; C Hürny; J Bernhard; J Lindtner; J Collins; H J Senn; F Cavalli; J Forbes; A Gudgeon; E Simoncini; H Cortes-Funes; A Veronesi; M Fey; A Goldhirsch Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2000-04 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Véronique L Roger; Susan A Weston; Yariv Gerber; Jill M Killian; Shannon M Dunlay; Allan S Jaffe; Malcolm R Bell; Jan Kors; Barbara P Yawn; Steven J Jacobsen Journal: Circulation Date: 2010-02-08 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Morten Schmidt; Sinna Pilgaard Ulrichsen; Lars Pedersen; Hans Erik Bøtker; Henrik Toft Sørensen Journal: Eur J Heart Fail Date: 2016-02-11 Impact factor: 15.534
Authors: Robert W Yeh; Stephen Sidney; Malini Chandra; Michael Sorel; Joseph V Selby; Alan S Go Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2010-06-10 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Michael A Campitelli; Colleen J Maxwell; Laura C Maclagan; Dennis T Ko; Chaim M Bell; Lianne Jeffs; Andrew M Morris; Kate L Lapane; Nick Daneman; Susan E Bronskill Journal: CMAJ Date: 2019-01-14 Impact factor: 8.262
Authors: Rebecca T Emeny; Chiang-Hua Chang; Jonathan Skinner; A James O'Malley; Jeremy Smith; Gouri Chakraborti; Clifford J Rosen; Nancy E Morden Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2019-11-01