Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33103558›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Heart Association2020

Inclusion of Older People Reflective of Real-World Clinical Practice in Cardiovascular Drug Trials.

Gillian E Caughey, Maria C Inacio, J Simon Bell, Agnes I Vitry, Sepehr Shakib

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Heart Association, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Clinical trials in older people.Age and ageing · 2022
    Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Gillian E CaugheyRegistry of Senior Australians (ROSA) South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute Adelaide South Australia Australia.
Maria C InacioRegistry of Senior Australians (ROSA) South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute Adelaide South Australia Australia.
J Simon BellDivision of Health Sciences University of South Australia Adelaide Australia.
Agnes I VitryDivision of Health Sciences University of South Australia Adelaide Australia.
Sepehr ShakibDiscipline of Pharmacology Adelaide Medical School The University of Adelaide Australia.
University of South Australia · AURoyal Adelaide Hospital · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background Underrepresentation of older people in clinical trials remains. This study aimed to examine the inclusion of older people and associated safety and efficacy reports from clinical trials of new molecular entities for cardiovascular disease indications since commencement of the US Food and Drug Administration Drug Trial Snapshot (DTS) Program. The DTS provides concise information on participants included in clinical trials supporting US Food and Drug Administration approval of new drugs. Methods and Results A cross-sectional analysis between January 1, 2015 and April 30, 2019 of DTS data including approval date, indication, number of trials and participants, age distribution, efficacy, and safety statements was conducted. Participation-to-prevalence ratio (PPR) was used to describe representation of older participants in trials relative to disease population. Efficacy and safety statements regarding age were compared with drug prescribing information. A total of 72 079 participants from 10 DTS reports were identified and 39 625 (55.0%) were aged ≥65 years old. Overall, 63.6% of cardiovascular disease DTS reports were representative of people aged ≥65 years old for specific cardiovascular disease conditions. Underrepresentation was observed in 4 DTS: 2 for heart failure (PPR 0.48 and 0.62), 1 for pulmonary arterial hypertension (PPR 0.72), and 1 for venous thromboembolism (PPR 0.38). Participants in clinical trials for new drugs for the treatment of atrial fibrillation (PPR 0.99 and 1.21) and hypercholesterolemia (PPR 0.84 and 0.97) were reflective of the older population for these diseases. An increased risk of adverse events in older participants was reported in 40% DTS safety statements but no differences were reported in the drug product information. Conclusions Despite the fact that >60% of cardiovascular disease trial participants for new molecular entities included in the DTS program were representative of the older population in real-world clinical practice, concerns remain for conditions including heart failure or venous thromboembolism. Drug product information safety statements regarding age differences in adverse events were not reflective of trial findings. An increased directive is needed to facilitate the generation of real-world evidence and appropriate reporting within drug product information for these potentially at-risk patient populations.

Indexed as

Drug ApprovalPatient SelectionAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAge FactorsCardiovascular AgentsCardiovascular DiseasesCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPractice Patterns, Physicians'Randomized Controlled Trials as TopicCardiovascular Agentscardiovascular diseaseclinical trialsolder populationreal‐world evidence

Identifiers

PMID33103558
PMCPMC7763407
OpenAlexW3093943395

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.