ArticleClinical and translational science2021
Data driven evaluation of healthy volunteer characteristics at screening for phase I clinical trials to inform on study design and optimize screening processes.
Article in Clinical and translational science, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- How to Optimize Healthy Volunteer Screening and Enrolment in Clinical Trials: A Qualitative and Quantitative Approach to Evaluate Processes and Healthy Volunteers' Perceptions.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2026Article
- Interpretation of Chemistry, Hematology and Coagulation Laboratory Results in Early-Phase Clinical Pharmacology Trials; a Retrospective Analysis Based on the Placebo Arm of Randomized-Controlled Trials.Clinical and translational science · 2026Article
- The predictive value of C-reactive protein-triglycerides-glucose index-waist-to-height ratio for stroke: a nationwide cohort study.Cardiovascular diabetology · 2026Article
- A multi-step screening algorithm for fecal microbiota transplantation donors: integrating metagenomic and metabolomic profiling for improved safety and donor quality assessment.Frontiers in microbiology · 2026Article
- Clinical data warehouse analysis of clinical laboratory test results of Korean healthy volunteers: does "not clinically significant" range of healthy volunteers need modification?Translational and clinical pharmacology · 2025Article
- Data driven evaluation of healthy volunteer characteristics at screening for phase I clinical trials to inform on study design and optimize screening processes.Clinical and translational science · 2021Article
- Characteristics, Motivations, and Preferences of Healthy Volunteers in Phase I Clinical Trials in Sweden.Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHREArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Protocols for clinical trials describe inclusion and exclusion criteria based on general and compound-specific considerations to ensure subject safety and data quality. In phase I clinical trials, healthy volunteers (HVs) are screened against these criteria that often specify predefined eligibility ranges for vital signs, electrocardiogram, and laboratory tests. HVs are excluded if baseline parameters deviate from these ranges even though this may not indicate underlying pathology, which could delay trial execution. Data from 3365 HVs participating in 9670 screening visits for 94 phase I HV trials, conducted between December 2008 and May 2019 at the Janssen Clinical Pharmacology Unit, were retrospectively analyzed. Commonly predefined protocol ranges were overlaid with HV data to estimate predicted screen failure rates (SFRs). Of the overall population, 91% was White and 64% were men with mean age of 42.8 ± 12.5 years. High predicted SFRs are related to cardiovascular/metabolic (body mass index, heart rate [HR], blood pressure [BP], and corrected QT Fridericia's formula [QTcF]), renal (estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR]), liver (alanine aminotransferase [ALT], and total bilirubin), and coagulation (prothrombin time [PT]) parameters. Predicted SFRs increased with age for high systolic and diastolic BP, QTcF interval, and eGFR. In contrast, lower SFRs in the older age groups were seen for low diastolic BP, liver function test, ALT, PT, and total bilirubin. This analysis can be used to inform on study design, protocol inclusion and exclusion criteria, and to optimize the screening process. Data-driven critical appraisal of proposed inclusion and exclusion criteria using a risk-based approach may significantly reduce screen failure rates without compromising subjects' safety.
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.