Varun Takyar1, Anand Nath1,2, Andrea Beri3, Ahmed M Gharib4, Yaron Rotman1. 1. Liver & Energy Metabolism Unit, Liver Diseases Branch, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD. 2. Department of Medicine, Medstar Washington Hospital Center, Washington, DC. 3. Laboratory for Informatics Development, Biomedical Translational Research Information System, Clinical Center, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD. 4. Biomedical and Metabolic Imaging Branch, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, Bethesda, MD.
Abstract
Healthy volunteers are crucial for biomedical research. Inadvertent inclusion of subjects with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) as controls can compromise study validity and subject safety. Given the rising prevalence of NAFLD in the general population, we sought to identify its prevalence and potential impact in volunteers for clinical trials. We conducted a cross-sectional study of subjects who were classified as healthy volunteers between 2011 and 2015 and had no known liver disease. Subjects were classified as presumed NAFLD (pNF; alanine aminotransferase [ALT] level ≥ 20 for women or ≥ 31 for men and body mass index [BMI] > 25 kg/m2 ), healthy non-NAFLD controls (normal ALT and BMI), or indeterminate. A total of 3160 subjects participated as healthy volunteers in 149 clinical trials (1-29 trials per subject); 1732 of these subjects (55%) had a BMI > 25 kg/m2 and 1382 (44%) had abnormal ALT. pNF was present in 881 subjects (27.9%), and these subjects were older than healthy control subjects and had higher triglycerides, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and HbA1c and lower high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (P < 0.001 for all). The 149 trials included 101 non-interventional, 33 interventional, and 15 vaccine trials. The impact on study validity of recruiting NAFLD subjects as controls was estimated as likely, probable, and unlikely in 10, 41, and 98 trials, respectively. The proportion of pNF subjects (28%-29%) did not differ by impact. Only 14% of trials used both BMI and ALT for screening. ALT cutoffs for screening were based on local reference values. Grade 3-4 ALT elevations during the study period were rare but more common in pNF subjects than in healthy control subjects (4 versus 1). CONCLUSION: NAFLD is common and often overlooked in volunteers for clinical trials, despite its potential impact on subject safety and validity of study findings. Increased awareness of NAFLD prevalence and stricter ALT cutoffs may ameliorate this problem. (Hepatology 2017;66:825-833). Published 2017. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.
Healthy volunteers are crucial for biomedical research. Inadvertent inclusion of subjects with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) as controls can compromise study validity and subject safety. Given the rising prevalence of NAFLD in the general population, we sought to identify its prevalence and potential impact in volunteers for clinical trials. We conducted a cross-sectional study of subjects who were classified as healthy volunteers between 2011 and 2015 and had no known liver disease. Subjects were classified as presumed NAFLD (pNF; alanine aminotransferase [ALT] level ≥ 20 for women or ≥ 31 for men and body mass index [BMI] > 25 kg/m2 ), healthy non-NAFLD controls (normal ALT and BMI), or indeterminate. A total of 3160 subjects participated as healthy volunteers in 149 clinical trials (1-29 trials per subject); 1732 of these subjects (55%) had a BMI > 25 kg/m2 and 1382 (44%) had abnormal ALT. pNF was present in 881 subjects (27.9%), and these subjects were older than healthy control subjects and had higher triglycerides, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and HbA1c and lower high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (P < 0.001 for all). The 149 trials included 101 non-interventional, 33 interventional, and 15 vaccine trials. The impact on study validity of recruiting NAFLD subjects as controls was estimated as likely, probable, and unlikely in 10, 41, and 98 trials, respectively. The proportion of pNF subjects (28%-29%) did not differ by impact. Only 14% of trials used both BMI and ALT for screening. ALT cutoffs for screening were based on local reference values. Grade 3-4 ALT elevations during the study period were rare but more common in pNF subjects than in healthy control subjects (4 versus 1). CONCLUSION: NAFLD is common and often overlooked in volunteers for clinical trials, despite its potential impact on subject safety and validity of study findings. Increased awareness of NAFLD prevalence and stricter ALT cutoffs may ameliorate this problem. (Hepatology 2017;66:825-833). Published 2017. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.
Authors: B C Ferslew; C K Johnston; E Tsakalozou; A S Bridges; M F Paine; W Jia; P W Stewart; A S Barritt; K L R Brouwer Journal: Clin Pharmacol Ther Date: 2015-03-15 Impact factor: 6.875
Authors: Peng Li; Thomas A Robertson; Camilla A Thorling; Qian Zhang; Linda M Fletcher; Darrell H G Crawford; Michael S Roberts Journal: Drug Metab Dispos Date: 2011-01-18 Impact factor: 3.922
Authors: Mariana Lazo; Ruben Hernaez; Mark S Eberhardt; Susanne Bonekamp; Ihab Kamel; Eliseo Guallar; Ayman Koteish; Frederick L Brancati; Jeanne M Clark Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2013-05-23 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: M Shadab Siddiqui; Richard K Sterling; Velimir A Luketic; Puneet Puri; R Todd Stravitz; Iliana Bouneva; Sherry Boyett; Michael Fuchs; Carol Sargeant; G Russell Warnick; Shahrzad Grami; Arun J Sanyal Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2013-08-21 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: Banrida Wahlang; Savitri Appana; K Cameron Falkner; Craig J McClain; Guy Brock; Matthew C Cave Journal: Environ Sci Pollut Res Int Date: 2019-12-23 Impact factor: 4.223
Authors: Robert D Guber; Varun Takyar; Angela Kokkinis; Derrick A Fox; Hawwa Alao; Ilona Kats; Dara Bakar; Alan T Remaley; Stephen M Hewitt; David E Kleiner; Chia-Ying Liu; Colleen Hadigan; Kenneth H Fischbeck; Yaron Rotman; Christopher Grunseich Journal: Neurology Date: 2017-11-15 Impact factor: 9.910