Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add more filters











Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Sci Rep ; 14(1): 15036, 2024 07 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38951633

ABSTRACT

Overly restrictive clinical trial eligibility criteria can reduce generalizability, slow enrollment, and disproportionately exclude historically underrepresented populations. The eligibility criteria for 196 Alzheimer's Disease and Related Dementias (AD/ADRD) trials funded by the National Institute on Aging were analyzed to identify common criteria and their potential to disproportionately exclude participants by race/ethnicity. The trials were categorized by type (48 Phase I/II pharmacological, 7 Phase III/IV pharmacological, 128 non-pharmacological, 7 diagnostic, and 6 neuropsychiatric) and target population (51 AD/ADRD, 58 Mild Cognitive Impairment, 25 at-risk, and 62 cognitively normal). Eligibility criteria were coded into the following categories: Medical, Neurologic, Psychiatric, and Procedural. A literature search was conducted to describe the prevalence of disparities for eligibility criteria for African Americans/Black (AA/B), Hispanic/Latino (H/L), American Indian/Alaska Native (AI/AN) and Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander (NH/PI) populations. The trials had a median of 15 criteria. The most frequent criterion were age cutoffs (87% of trials), specified neurologic (65%), and psychiatric disorders (61%). Underrepresented groups could be disproportionately excluded by 16 eligibility categories; 42% of trials specified English-speakers only in their criteria. Most trials (82%) contain poorly operationalized criteria (i.e., criteria not well defined that can have multiple interpretations/means of implementation) and criteria that may reduce racial/ethnic enrollment diversity.


Subject(s)
Alzheimer Disease , Clinical Trials as Topic , Patient Selection , Humans , Alzheimer Disease/epidemiology , Alzheimer Disease/diagnosis , Cognitive Dysfunction/epidemiology , Dementia/epidemiology , Eligibility Determination , Ethnicity , National Institute on Aging (U.S.) , United States/epidemiology , Black or African American , Hispanic or Latino , American Indian or Alaska Native , Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
2.
J Alzheimers Dis ; 82(1): 107-127, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33998537

ABSTRACT

Alzheimer's disease and Alzheimer's disease-related dementias (AD/ADRD) disproportionally affect Hispanic and Latino populations, yet Hispanics/Latinos are substantially underrepresented in AD/ADRD clinical research. Diverse inclusion in trials is an ethical and scientific imperative, as underrepresentation reduces the ability to generalize study findings and treatments across populations most affected by a disease. This paper presents findings from a narrative literature review (N = 210) of the current landscape of Hispanic/Latino participation in clinical research, including the challenges, facilitators, and communication channels to conduct culturally appropriate outreach efforts to increase awareness and participation of Hispanics/Latinos in AD/ADRD clinical research studies. Many challenges identified were systemic in nature: lack of culturally relevant resources; staffing that does not represent participants' cultures/language; eligibility criteria that disproportionately excludes Hispanics/Latinos; and too few studies available in Hispanic/Latino communities. The paper also details facilitators and messaging strategies to improve engagement and interest among Hispanics/Latinos in AD/ADRD research, starting with approaches that recognize and address the heterogeneity of the Hispanic/Latino ethnicity, and then, tailor outreach activities and programs to address their diverse needs and circumstances. The needs identified in this article represent longstanding failures to improve engagement and interest among Hispanics/Latinos in AD/ADRD research; we discuss how the field can move forward learning from the experiences of the COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
Alzheimer Disease , COVID-19 , Clinical Trials as Topic , Dementia , Hispanic or Latino/statistics & numerical data , Alzheimer Disease/drug therapy , Alzheimer Disease/epidemiology , COVID-19/complications , Dementia/drug therapy , Dementia/epidemiology , Ethnicity/statistics & numerical data , Humans
3.
Clin Cancer Res ; 25(23): 6925-6931, 2019 12 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31439585

ABSTRACT

Early drug development for cancer requires broad collaboration and skilled clinical investigators to enable enrollment of patients whose tumors have defined molecular profiles. To respond to these challenges, the National Cancer Institute (NCI) transformed its 60-year-old early-phase drug development program in 2014 into the Experimental Therapeutics Clinical Trials Network (ETCTN). The ETCTN is a consolidated, national network of 40+ academic institutions responsible for conducting more than 100 early-phase clinical trials. It promotes team science coordinated among basic, translational, and clinical investigators, emphasizing the inclusion of early career trialists. This perspective provides a brief overview of the ETCTN, summarizes its successes and challenges over its first grant funding cycle, and discusses the program's future directions. Measures indicated strong connectivity across the institutions, significant increases in investigator approval of the ETCTN scientific portfolio from years 1 to 4, and substantial research activity over 5 years, with 334 letters of intent submitted, 102 trials activated, and 3,570 patients accrued. The ETCTN's successful adoption relied heavily on the inclusion of senior investigators who have long-standing interactions with the NCI and a willingness to participate in a team science approach and to mentor early career investigators. In addition, NCI invested substantial resources in a centralized infrastructure to conduct trials and to support the inclusion of biomarkers in its studies. The ETCTN provides evidence that a collaborative national clinical trial network for early drug development is feasible and can address the demands of precision medicine approaches to oncologic clinical trials.


Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Agents/therapeutic use , Clinical Trials as Topic , Drug Development , Neoplasms/drug therapy , Neoplasms/economics , Research Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Research Support as Topic/economics , Financing, Organized , Humans , National Cancer Institute (U.S.) , Neoplasms/diagnosis , Program Development , United States
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL