ABSTRACT
AIMS: Little is known about the enrollment practice of both Black, Indigenous and People of Color (BIPOC) and females in the US diabetes trials. We aimed to perform a chronological survey to evaluate the enrollment of BIPOC and female participants in the US diabetes randomized controlled trials (RCTs) over the past two decades. METHODS: We searched databases to systematically include the US diabetes RCTs from 2000 January 1st to 2020 December 31st. Primary outcome was the adequate enrollment of both BIPOC and females, defined by the participation to prevalence ratio (PPR) > 0.8. We tested the temporal trend in adequate enrollment over time and used logistic regression analysis to explore the relationship between adequate enrollment and trial characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 69 US diabetes trials were included for analyses, with a median BIPOC and female enrollment percentage of 29.0 % and 45.4 % respectively. There were 22 (31.9 %) trials with adequate enrollment of both BIPOC and females. No significant trend of adequate enrollment percentage of BIPOC and females over time was observed (P = 0.16). Of trial types, those with medication interventions were significantly related to decreased odds of adequate enrollment, when compared to trials with non-drug interventions (odds ratio = 0.29, 95 % confidence interval: 0.11-0.84). CONCLUSIONS: Less than one third of the US diabetes trials adequately enrolled both BIPOC and females over the past two decades, and no temporal improvement in BIPOC and female participant enrollment was observed. These results highlight the need for more endeavors to mitigate inadequate representation regarding BIPOC and female enrollment in diabetes trials.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: patients hospitalised with covid-19 suffer thrombotic complications. risk factors for poor outcomes are shared with coronary artery disease. Objectives: to investigate efficacy of an acute coronary syndrome regimen in patients hospitalised with covid-19 and coronary disease risk factors. PATIENTS/METHODS: a randomised controlled open-label trial across acute hospitals (uk and brazil) added aspirin, clopidogrel, low-dose rivaroxaban, atorvastatin, and omeprazole to standard care for 28-days. primary efficacy and safety outcomes were 30-day mortality and bleeding. the key secondary outcome was a daily clinical status (at home, in hospital, on intensive therapy unit admission, death). RESULTS: 320 patients from 9 centres were randomised. the trial terminated early due to low recruitment. at 30 days there was no significant difference in mortality (intervention: 11.5% vs control: 15%, unadjusted or 0.73, 95%ci 0.38 to 1.41, p=0.355). significant bleeds were infrequent and not significantly different between the arms (intervention: 1.9% vs control 1.9%, p>0.999). using a bayesian markov longitudinal ordinal model, it was 93% probable that intervention arm participants were more likely to transition to a better clinical state each day (or 1.46, 95% cri 0.88 to 95 2.37, pr(beta>0) =93%; adjusted or 1.50, 95% cri 0.91 to 2.45, pr(beta>0) =95%) and median time to discharge home was two days shorter (95% cri -4 to 0, 2% probability that it was worse). CONCLUSIONS: acute coronary syndrome treatment regimen was associated with a 99 reduction in the length of hospital stay without an excess in major bleeding. a larger trial is needed to evaluate mortality.
Subject(s)
Acute Coronary Syndrome , COVID-19ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Coagulopathy, in the form of either venous or arterial thromboembolism, is one of the most severe sequelae of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) and has been associated with poorer outcomes. However, the role of therapeutic anticoagulation (tAC) or prophylactic anticoagulation (pAC) in COVID-19 patients has not been definitely established. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to gather all the available real-world data in the field and to provide a reliable effect size of the effect on mortality of tAC compared to pAC in COVID-19 patients. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Real-world studies (RWS) were identified by searching electronic databases from inception to 31st October, 2021. Randomized controlled trials were excluded. Mortality and bleedings were considered as primary and secondary outcomes, respectively. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: 10 RWS and 5541 patients were included in the analysis. Overall, tAC was associated with lower mortality (HR=0.62, 95% CI: 0.54-0.71). There was asymmetry at the funnel plot suggesting publication bias, that was not confirmed at the Egger test (P=0.07). For the secondary endpoint, there was a non-statistically significant tendency for more bleedings in patients treated with tAC compared to pAC (RR=1.75, 95% CI: 0.81-3.81). CONCLUSIONS: Our meta-analysis, based on RWS and adjusted estimates of risk, suggests a survival benefit of tAC over pAC in COVID-19 patients in the real world.