scholarly journals A Review of Ginseng Clinical Trials Registered in the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform

2018 ◽  
Vol 2018 ◽  
pp. 1-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yingchun He ◽  
Juan Yang ◽  
Yinghua Lv ◽  
Junchao Chen ◽  
Fang Yin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Comprehensive Evaluation ◽  
Clinical Settings ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Funding Sources ◽  
Quality Trial ◽  
High Quality Trial ◽  
Design Type ◽  
Duration Condition ◽  
Clinical Trials Registry

Although ginseng has long been broadly used in clinical settings around the world, few clinical trials on ginseng have been conducted. The objective of this study was to provide a comprehensive evaluation of the characteristics of ginseng clinical trials registered in the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) as of December 2017 regarding their frequency, design, type of ginseng, dosage, duration, condition, funding sources, and publication status. A total of 134 ginseng clinical studies were registered from 2002 to 2017, of which 60.4% were completed and 23.1% are actively recruiting participants. A large number of trials were associated with aspects of high-quality trial design. Overall, 94% of the trials employed randomized allocation to study arms, 78.4% were double-blind studies using placebo as one of the control groups, and 71% were published as completed trials. Trials whose sample size was restricted to fewer than 100 participants accounted for 74.7% of the total. Of the primary funding sources for ginseng studies, 67.2% were nonindustry organizations. The ginseng clinical trials were heterogeneous with respect to ginseng species and variety, indications, dose, duration, and participant characteristics. Clearly, stricter and methodologically suitable studies are needed to demonstrate the efficacy and safety of ginseng.

scholarly journals Investigation-Based Drug Value Framework in Hodgkin Lymphoma

Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 2262-2262
Author(s):  
Ohad Oren
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Hodgkin Lymphoma ◽  
Scoring System ◽  
Conflicts Of Interest ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Nccn Guidelines ◽  
Significant Toxicity ◽  
Anti Cancer ◽  
Quality Trial ◽  
High Quality Trial

Abstract Background Currently available drug value frameworks integrate data about a medication's benefits and risks. However, the strength of the research data supporting the use of one medication versus another is highly variable. The greater the number and quality of well-conducted trials underlying a certain intervention, the stronger its potential favorable contribution to public health. Drug value should therefore also be a function of the magnitude of clinical evidence gleaned from high-quality clinical trials. Methods We propose an investigation-driven value framework that determines the merit of a drug based on the overall available evidence, including the rigour of relevant trials. The NCCN Hodgkin Lymphoma guidelines were reviewed and data collected about commonly used regimens for Classic HL. Value scores were determined for each drug combination. Results A model was designed incorporating information about the number of RCTs conducted, the total number of participants enrolled, and the generalizability to real-world populations, in addition to the drug's efficacy, significant toxicity and cost (Figure 1). Practice-changing trials supporting each of the currently-endorsed regimens were collected from the HL NCCN guidelines (ABVD, 4; Stanford V 4; Esc BEACOPP 2). The average number of participants per trial was higher for ABVD (1,126) and Esc BEACOPP (1,890) than for Stanford V (267). The generalizability score for the three compounds was 0.5 (ABVD), 0.25 (Stanford V) and -1 (Esc BEACOPP). The mean 5-year overall survival rate was higher in the case of ABVD (96.2%) and Esc BEACOPP (96.1%) compared with Stanford V (92.0%). The toxicity score was 1.24 (ABVD), 3 (Stanford V) and 2.5 (Esc BEACOPP). Using a multi-factorial value scoring system, ABVD, Esc BEACOPP and Stanford V obtained 11.5, 9.5 and 8.5 points, respectively. A scoring system that focused on traditional factors alone (efficacy, toxicity, cost) yielded different scores (ABVD, 7.7; Stanford V 6.7; Esc BEACOPP, 6.5). Conclusion The robustness of clinical trials investigating anti-cancer regimens deserves special consideration when defining drug value. Three high-quality trial characteristics help stratify common regimens in HL into higher/lower value strata using a simple, easy to use algorithm. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

scholarly journals Transparency and accuracy in funding investigator-initiated clinical trials: a systematic search in clinical trials databases

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (5) ◽  
pp. e023394 ◽  
Author(s):  
Catarina Madeira ◽  
Francisco Santos ◽  
Christine Kubiak ◽  
Jacques Demotes ◽  
Emília Carreira Monteiro
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Study Data ◽  
Systematic Search ◽  
Non Profit ◽  
Funding Sources ◽  
Funding Agencies ◽  
National Performance ◽  
Clinical Trials Registry ◽  
Design And Methods

ObjectivesThis study aims to identify the sources of funding for investigator-initiated clinical trials (IICTs) in Portugal, and to recommend ways to improve the quality of information collected from clinical trial databases about funding.Design and methodsA systematic search of trial registrations over the last 13 years—using the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO-ICTRP) and four clinical trials registries (CTRs)—was carried out to identify IICTs in Portugal, used as a case study. Data from the databases were compared with data contained in publications to evaluate the consistency of information on funding sources. The term ‘database’ is used in this study to refer to both the WHO-ICTRP and the CTRs. When mentioned separately, the WHO-ICTRP is referred to as a ‘platform’, while the CTRs are referred to as ‘registries’.OutcomeSuggestions to improve clinical trials databases to clearly identify the funding sources and data ownership in IICTs.ResultsTwo hundred and eighty-two IICTs were identified in Portugal. Twenty per cent of trials were supported by industry with unclear information on the ownership of the results. Inaccuracy was found in the information about sponsors and funders. The information about funding in all resulting publications (77 out of 133 completed studies) was also inconsistent between databases in 35 out of 77 (45%) of the studies. Notably, 23% of the trials funded by non-profit organisations (n=226) received funds from international and/or national funding agencies.ConclusionsIdentification of IICT funding and ownership of results is unclear in the databases used for this study, which may lead to misunderstandings about the independence of the obtained results. Transparency and accuracy are desirable so that public decision makers and strategic partners can accurately evaluate national performance in this particular type of clinical research.

scholarly journals Clinical trial registries as Scientometric data: A novel solution for linking and deduplicating clinical trials from multiple registries

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christian Thiele ◽  
Gerrit Hirschfeld ◽  
Ruth von Brachel
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Random Forest ◽  
Random Forest Model ◽  
Scientometric Analysis ◽  
Data Set ◽  
The Public ◽  
Forest Model ◽  
Clinical Trial Registries ◽  
Multiple Primary ◽  
Clinical Trials Registry

AbstractRegistries of clinical trials are a potential source for scientometric analysis of medical research and serve important functions for the research community and the public at large. Clinical trials that recruit patients in Germany are usually registered in the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS) or in international registries such as ClinicalTrials.gov. Furthermore, the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) aggregates trials from multiple primary registries. We queried the DRKS, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the ICTRP for trials with a recruiting location in Germany. Trials that were registered in multiple registries were linked using the primary and secondary identifiers and a Random Forest model based on various similarity metrics. We identified 35,912 trials that were conducted in Germany. The majority of the trials was registered in multiple databases. 32,106 trials were linked using primary IDs, 26 were linked using a Random Forest model, and 10,537 internal duplicates on ICTRP were identified using the Random Forest model after finding pairs with matching primary or secondary IDs. In cross-validation, the Random Forest increased the F1-score from 96.4% to 97.1% compared to a linkage based solely on secondary IDs on a manually labelled data set. 28% of all trials were registered in the German DRKS. 54% of the trials on ClinicalTrials.gov, 43% of the trials on the DRKS and 56% of the trials on the ICTRP were pre-registered. The ratio of pre-registered studies and the ratio of studies that are registered in the DRKS increased over time.

scholarly journals Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs in Colorectal Cancer Chemoprevention

Cancers ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 594
Author(s):  
Jadwiga Maniewska ◽  
Dagmara Jeżewska
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Cell Proliferation ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Cancer Chemoprevention ◽  
Tumor Cell Proliferation ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
New Approach ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Inflammatory Drugs ◽  
Chemopreventive Effect

Since colorectal cancer is one of the world’s most common cancers, studies on its prevention and early diagnosis are an emerging area of clinical oncology these days. For this study, a review of randomized controlled, double-blind clinical trials of selected NSAIDs (aspirin, sulindac and celecoxib) in chemoprevention of colorectal cancer was conducted. The main molecular anticancer activity of NSAIDs is thought to be a suppression of prostaglandin E2 synthesis via cyclooxygenase-2 inhibition, which causes a decrease in tumor cell proliferation, angiogenesis, and increases apoptosis. The lower incidence of colorectal cancer in the NSAID patients suggests the long-lasting chemopreventive effect of drugs studied. This new approach to therapy of colorectal cancer may transform the disease from a terminal to a chronic one that can be taken under control.

scholarly journals Spontaneous improvement of carbohydrate-deficient transferrin in PMM2-CDG without mannose observed in CDG natural history study

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Witters ◽  
Andrew C. Edmondson ◽  
Christina Lam ◽  
Christin Johnsen ◽  
Marc C. Patterson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Natural History ◽  
Randomized Study ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Natural History Study ◽  
Natural History Studies ◽  
Carbohydrate Deficient Transferrin ◽  
Spontaneous Improvement

AbstractA recent report on long-term dietary mannose supplementation in phosphomannomutase 2 deficiency (PMM2-CDG) claimed improved glycosylation and called for double-blind randomized study of the dietary supplement in PMM2-CDG patients. A lack of efficacy of short-term mannose supplementation in multiple prior reports challenge this study’s conclusions. Additionally, some CDG types have previously been reported to demonstrate spontaneous improvement in glycosylated biomarkers, including transferrin. We have likewise observed improvements in transferrin glycosylation without mannose supplementation. This observation questions the reliability of transferrin as a therapeutic outcome measure in clinical trials for PMM2-CDG. We are concerned that renewed focus on mannose therapy in PMM2-CDG will detract from clinical trials of more promising therapies. Approaches to increase efficiency of clinical trials and ultimately improve patients’ lives requires prospective natural history studies and identification of reliable biomarkers linked to clinical outcomes in CDG. Collaborations with patients and families are essential to identifying meaningful study outcomes.

scholarly journals “Include me if you can”—reasons for low enrollment of pediatric patients in a psychopharmacological trial

Trials ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Larissa Niemeyer ◽  
Konstantin Mechler ◽  
Jan Buitelaar ◽  
Sarah Durston ◽  
Bram Gooskens ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Demographic Data ◽  
Autism Spectrum ◽  
Current Therapy ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Controlled Clinical Trial ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Clinical Patient ◽  
Compulsive Disorder

Abstract Background Low recruitment in clinical trials is a common and costly problem which undermines medical research. This study aimed to investigate the challenges faced in recruiting children and adolescents with obsessive-compulsive disorder and autism spectrum disorder for a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial and to analyze reasons for non-participation. The trial was part of the EU FP7 project TACTICS (Translational Adolescent and Childhood Therapeutic Interventions in Compulsive Syndromes). Methods Demographic data on pre-screening patients were collected systematically, including documented reasons for non-participation. Findings were grouped according to content, and descriptive statistical analyses of the data were performed. Results In total, n = 173 patients were pre-screened for potential participation in the clinical trial. Of these, only five (2.9%) were eventually enrolled. The main reasons for non-inclusion were as follows: failure to meet all inclusion criteria/meeting one or more of the exclusion criteria (n = 73; 42.2%), no interest in the trial or trials in general (n = 40; 23.1%), and not wanting changes to current therapy/medication (n = 14; 8.1%). Conclusions The findings from this study add valuable information to the existing knowledge on reasons for low clinical trial recruitment rates in pediatric psychiatric populations. Low enrollment and high exclusion rates raise the question of whether such selective study populations are representative of clinical patient cohorts. Consequently, the generalizability of the results of such trials may be limited. The present findings will be useful in the development of improved recruitment strategies and may guide future research in establishing the measurement of representativeness to ensure enhanced external validity in psychopharmacological clinical trials in pediatric populations. Trial registration EudraCT 2014-003080-38. Registered on 14 July 2014.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document