The importance of patient-reported outcomes: a call for their comprehensive integration in cardiovascular clinical trials.

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs), such as symptoms, health-related quality of life (HRQOL), or patient perceived health status, are reported directly by the patient and are powerful tools to inform patients, clinicians, and policy-makers about morbidity and 'patient suffering', especially in chronic diseases. Patient-reported outcomes provide information on the patient experience and can be the target of therapeutic intervention. Patient-reported outcomes can improve the quality of patient care by creating a holistic approach to clinical decision-making; however, PROs are not routinely used as key outcome measures in major cardiovascular clinical trials. Thus, limited information is available on the impact of cardiovascular therapeutics on PROs to guide patient-level clinical decision-making or policy-level decision-making. Cardiovascular clinical research should shift its focus to include PROs when evaluating the efficacy of therapeutic interventions, and PRO assessments should be scientifically rigorous. The European Society of Cardiology and other professional societies can take action to influence the uptake of PRO data in the research and clinical communities. This process of integrating PRO data into comprehensive efficacy evaluations will ultimately improve the quality of care for patients across the spectrum of cardiovascular disease.

Diversity in modern heart failure trials: Where are we, and where are we going.

Over the last three decades, increased attention has been given to the representation of historically underrepresented groups within the landscape of pivotal clinical trials. However, recent events (i.e., coronavirus pandemic) have laid bare the potential continuation of historic inequities in available clinical trials and studies aimed at the care of broad patient populations. Anecdotally, cardiovascular disease (CVD) has not been immune to these disparities. Within this review, we examine and discuss recent landmark CVD trials, with a specific focus on the representation of Blacks within several critically foundational heart failure clinical trials tied to contemporary treatment strategies and drug approvals. We also discuss solutions for inequities within the landscape of cardiovascular trials. Building a more diverse clinical trial workforce coupled with intentional efforts to increase clinical trial diversity will advance equity in cardiovascular care.

The COVID-19 pandemic and new clinical trial activations.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has caused severe disruptions in care for many patients. A key question is whether the landscape of clinical research has also changed. METHODS: In a retrospective cohort study, we examined the association of the COVID-19 outbreak with new clinical trial activations. Trial data for all interventional and observational oncology, cardiovascular, and mental health studies from January 2015 through September 2020 were obtained from ClinicalTrials.gov . An interrupted time-series analysis with Poisson regression was used. RESULTS: We examined 62,252 trial activations. During the initial COVID-19 outbreak (February 2020 through May 2020), model-estimated monthly trial activations for US-based studies were only 57% of the expected estimate had the pandemic not occurred (relative risk = 0.57, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.61, p < .001). For non-US-based studies, the impact of the pandemic was less dramatic (relative risk = 0.77, 95% CI 0.73 to 0.82, p < .001), resulting in an overall 27% reduction in the relative risk of new trial activations for US-based trials compared to non-US-based trials (relative risk ratio = 0.73, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.81, p < .001). Although a rebound occurred in the initial reopening phase (June 2020 through September 2020), the rebound was weaker for US-based studies compared to non-US-based studies (relative risk ratio = 0.87, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.95, p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: These findings are consistent with the disproportionate burden of COVID-19 diagnoses and deaths during the initial phase of the pandemic in the USA. Reduced activation of cancer clinical trials will likely slow the pace of clinical research and new drug discovery, with long-term negative consequences for cancer patients. An important question is whether the renewed outbreak period of winter 2020/2021 will have a similarly negative impact on the initiation of new clinical research studies for non-COVID-19 diseases.