ArticleThe journal of nutrition, health & aging2014
Representation of older patients in clinical trials for drug approval in Japan.
Article in The journal of nutrition, health & aging, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A Risk-Benefit Assessment of Dementia Medications: Systematic Review of the Evidence.Drugs & aging · 2015Pooled it
- Challenges and opportunities to include patient-centric product design in industrial medicines development to improve therapeutic goals.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2020Review
- Long-Term Safety and Efficacy of Teneligliptin in Elderly Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: Subgroup Analysis of a 3-Year Post-Marketing Surveillance in Japan.Advances in therapy · 2020Article
- Safety and effectiveness of tofogliflozin in elderly Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: A post-marketing study (J-STEP/EL Study).Journal of diabetes investigation · 2017Observational
- Regulatory activities to address the needs of older patients.The journal of nutrition, health & aging · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To examine how target patients seen in clinical practice are represented in clinical trials for approved drugs in Japan, we compared the age distribution of older patients enrolled in confirmatory clinical trials for regulatory approval with that of the estimated actual patient population. Drugs for 6 chronic conditions common among older patients (diabetes mellitus, hypertension, rheumatoid arthritis, non-small cell lung cancer, depression and Alzheimer's disease) launched by 2012 in Japan were selected. The disparity in age distribution between patients in trials and patients seen in clinical practice varied depending on the disease, but older patients, especially those aged 75 or older, were generally underrepresented in clinical trials for regulatory approval in Japan. Under-representation of older patients in hypertension trials was particularly marked compared to other conditions, despite the similarity in age distribution of patients seen in clinical practice. One factor causing this disparity may be an upper age limit in clinical trial protocols. More effort is needed to properly characterize the benefits and risks of drugs for older patients. This should include the active enrollment of older patients in clinical trials, the establishment of better assessment tools such as pharmacometric approaches, and the appropriate planning and conducting of post-marketing surveys and studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.