RESUMO
RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: Almost 80% of individuals with chronic kidney disease (CKD) reside in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) and are potentially under-represented in randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs). We assessed the global distribution of RCTs comparing pharmacological treatments for CKD over the past two decades, as well as the magnitude and evolution of participation by LMICs. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review. SETTING & STUDY POPULATIONS: RCTs evaluating pharmacological interventions in adults with CKD. SELECTION CRITERIA FOR STUDIES: RCTs published between 2003-2023 and indexed in MEDLINE. DATA EXTRACTION: Each trial was reviewed and extracted independently by two investigators. Disagreements were settled by consensus or a third reviewer. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: RCT participation of World Bank-defined income groups and geographic regions were described and the representation indices (RI) according to RCT participants and estimated CKD prevalences were calculated. RCTs were also categorized as global, regional, or national in scope. RESULTS: Among 7,760 identified studies, we included 1,366 RCTs conducted in 84 countries with 301,158 participants. National, regional, and global RCTs represented 85.4%, 3.5%, and 11.1% of studies, respectively. LMICs were included in 34.7% of RCTs. No RCTs included participants from low-income countries, and lower-middle-income countries participated in 13.2%. Of participants from RCTs with available information, 25.4% (n=64,843/255,237) were from LMICs. According to the RI, six LMICs were over-represented (>1.25), seven adequately represented (0.75-1.25), and 26 under-represented (<0.75). Most (80.2%) global CKD RCTs included LMICs; however, LMIC participants constituted only 32.9% of the global trial population. We observed a positive trend in LMIC inclusion over time, rising from 22.9% (n=71/310) in 2003-2007 to 45.5% (n=140/308) in 2018-2023. LIMITATIONS: The use of an income-group dichotomy, exclusion of non-randomized studies of intervention, and studies identified in one database. CONCLUSIONS: Despite an increase in participation over the past two decades, individuals with CKD from LMICs remain significantly under-represented in RCTs. These findings suggest that increased efforts are warranted to increase LMIC representation in pharmacological CKD RCTs.
RESUMO
Background: Randomized Clinical Trials (RCTs) are important tools to establish the effects of a given intervention. Investigators should focus on outcomes that patients perceive: patient-important outcomes (PIOs), clinical endpoints that patients value directly and reflect how they feel, function, or survive. However, it is easier to consider surrogated outcomes to reduce costs and achieve better-looking results. The problem with these outcomes is that they indirectly measure PIOs, which might not correlate linearly or translate reliably into a positive PIO. Methods: We systematically searched MEDLINE for atopic disease RCTs rated among the top 10 allergic diseases and general internal medicine journals from the last 10 years. Two independent reviewers worked in duplicate and independently to collect data from all eligible articles. We gathered information regarding the type of study, title, author information, journal, intervention type, atopic disease, and primary and secondary outcomes. We assessed the outcomes investigators used in RCTs of atopic diseases and asthma. Results: This quantitative analysis included n = 135 randomized clinical trials. The most studied atopic disease during the period selected was asthma (n = 69), followed by allergic rhinitis (n = 51). When divided by atopic disease, primary outcomes in RCTs valuing allergic rhinitis had the most significant proportion of PIOs (76.7), asthma surrogated outcomes (38), and asthma/allergic rhinitis laboratory outcomes (42.9). PIOs in allergic rhinitis trials had the most significant proportion of PIOs favoring the intervention (81.4), asthma had the greatest proportion of surrogated outcomes (33.3), and asthma/allergic rhinitis laboratory outcomes (40). When divided by atopic disease, trials studying atopic dermatitis and urticaria had the same proportion of PIOs (64.7) as their secondary outcomes. Asthma had the highest (37.5) surrogate outcomes. Journals of general/internal medicine had a greater proportion of PIOs, and a post hoc analysis showed a significant difference in the proportion and secondary outcomes that favored the intervention between PIOs and laboratory outcomes. Conclusion: Approximately 7.5 out of 10 primary outcomes in RCTs published in general/internal medicine are PIOs compared to 5 out of 10 primary outcomes in atopic disease journals. Investigators should focus on selecting patient-important outcomes in their clinical trials to establish clinical guidelines with better-quality recommendations that impact patients' life and values. Registration: International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO, NIHR) ID: CRD42021259256.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: On March 2020, World Health Organization (WHO) declared COVID-19 to be a pandemic disease. Interactions between allergy-related inflammatory and psychiatric disorders including depression, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) have been documented. Therefore, those who have pre-existing allergic conditions may have an increased psychiatric reaction to the stresses of the COVID-19 pandemic. OBJECTIVE: Identify the psychological impact of COVID-19 in patients with allergic diseases and determine if these individuals have a greater risk of presenting with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). METHODS: It is a cross-sectional, survey-based study designed to assess the degree of symptoms of depression and the risk of PTSD using the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) and the Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R), respectively, in allergic patients. RESULTS: A total of 4106 surveys were evaluated; 1656 (40.3%) were patients with allergic disease, and 2450 (59.7%) were non-allergic (control) individuals. Of those with allergies, 76.6% had respiratory allergic disease including asthma and allergic rhinitis. Individuals with allergic disease reported higher scores regarding symptoms of PTSD on the IES-R scale (p = 0.052, OR 1.24 CI 0.99-1.55) as well as a higher depression risk score in the PHQ-9 questionnaire (mean 6.82 vs. 5.28) p = 0.000 z = -8.76.The allergy group presented a higher score in the IES-R questionnaire (mean 25.42 vs. 20.59), being more susceptible to presenting PTSD (p = 0.000, z = -7.774).The individuals with allergic conditions were further divided into subgroups of those with respiratory allergies such as allergic rhinitis and asthma vs those with non-respiratory allergies such as drug and food allergy, urticaria and atopic dermatitis. This subgroup analysis compares respiratory versus non-respiratory allergic patients, with similar results on the IES-R (mean 25.87 vs 23.9) p = 0.0124, z = -1.539. There was no significant difference on intrusion (p = 0.061, z = -1.873) and avoidance (p = 0.767, z = -0.297), but in the hyperarousal subscale, patients with respiratory allergy had higher scores (mean 1.15 vs. 0.99) p = 0.013 z = -2.486. CONCLUSIONS: Psychological consequences such as depression and reported PTSD are present during the COVID-19 pandemic causing an impact particularly in individuals with allergic diseases. If we acknowledge the impact and how it is affecting our patients, we are able to implement interventions, follow up, and contribute to their overall well-being.