Clinical trial research agenda on COVID-19 - the first two years in Germany and beyond.
COVID-19
Clinical research
Deutschland
Germany
Klinische Forschung
Nicht-pharmazeutische Intervention
Non-pharmaceutical intervention
Journal
Zeitschrift fur Evidenz, Fortbildung und Qualitat im Gesundheitswesen
ISSN: 2212-0289
Titre abrégé: Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 101477604
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Nov 2022
Nov 2022
Historique:
received:
14
06
2022
revised:
15
07
2022
accepted:
10
08
2022
pubmed:
1
10
2022
medline:
15
12
2022
entrez:
30
9
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
We have followed the COVID-19 clinical trial research agenda from the beginning using the COVID-evidence.org platform. Now, two years after the COVID-19 pandemic started, our aim was to re-examine this research agenda with the latest data to provide a global perspective on the research landscape with a focus on Germany. We reviewed and updated previously published data on the COVID-19 clinical research agenda as of 28February 2022 focusing on randomized trials. We used the COVID-evidence.org platform including registry entries from ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform as well as publications from the Living OVerview of Evidence platform for COVID-19 (L·OVE). Two years on from the pandemic outbreak, there were 4,673 registered trials. The majority of these trials have remained small with a median of 120 planned participants (IQR 60-320). In the first hundred days of the pandemic most of them (50%) had been registered in China. More than two years later, the five countries with the most registered trials (alone or within a framework of international collaborations) were the USA (825 trials; 18%), Iran (619 trials; 13%), India (566 trials; 12%), China (353 trials; 8%), and Spain (309 trials; 7%). Only 119 trials were reported to have a study site in Germany (2.5% of the registered trials). Of the 4,673 trials registered, 15% (694 trials) had published their results by February 2022. The clinical research agenda has been marked by both successes, such as the large RECOVERY trial providing evidence on 10 treatments for COVID-19 including over 45,000 patients as of February 2022, and failures: worldwide only 57 randomized trials have been registered over two years that aimed to assess non-pharmaceutical interventions (e.g., face mask policies and lockdown measures) to prevent COVID-19, and only 11 of them had published results informing decisions that have an impact on the life of billions of people worldwide. The COVID-19 clinical research agenda has highlighted the substantial effort of the research community but also the challenges of the clinical research ecosystem. Most importantly, it has shed light on the ability to circumvent traditional barriers and to make trials more useful even under extraordinary conditions. The time to learn our lessons and apply them is now, and the time to demonstrate how we have improved the system is before the next pandemic.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
We have followed the COVID-19 clinical trial research agenda from the beginning using the COVID-evidence.org platform. Now, two years after the COVID-19 pandemic started, our aim was to re-examine this research agenda with the latest data to provide a global perspective on the research landscape with a focus on Germany.
METHODS
METHODS
We reviewed and updated previously published data on the COVID-19 clinical research agenda as of 28February 2022 focusing on randomized trials. We used the COVID-evidence.org platform including registry entries from ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform as well as publications from the Living OVerview of Evidence platform for COVID-19 (L·OVE).
RESULTS
RESULTS
Two years on from the pandemic outbreak, there were 4,673 registered trials. The majority of these trials have remained small with a median of 120 planned participants (IQR 60-320). In the first hundred days of the pandemic most of them (50%) had been registered in China. More than two years later, the five countries with the most registered trials (alone or within a framework of international collaborations) were the USA (825 trials; 18%), Iran (619 trials; 13%), India (566 trials; 12%), China (353 trials; 8%), and Spain (309 trials; 7%). Only 119 trials were reported to have a study site in Germany (2.5% of the registered trials). Of the 4,673 trials registered, 15% (694 trials) had published their results by February 2022. The clinical research agenda has been marked by both successes, such as the large RECOVERY trial providing evidence on 10 treatments for COVID-19 including over 45,000 patients as of February 2022, and failures: worldwide only 57 randomized trials have been registered over two years that aimed to assess non-pharmaceutical interventions (e.g., face mask policies and lockdown measures) to prevent COVID-19, and only 11 of them had published results informing decisions that have an impact on the life of billions of people worldwide.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
The COVID-19 clinical research agenda has highlighted the substantial effort of the research community but also the challenges of the clinical research ecosystem. Most importantly, it has shed light on the ability to circumvent traditional barriers and to make trials more useful even under extraordinary conditions. The time to learn our lessons and apply them is now, and the time to demonstrate how we have improved the system is before the next pandemic.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36180342
pii: S1865-9217(22)00160-X
doi: 10.1016/j.zefq.2022.08.003
pmc: PMC9514972
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Review
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
32-42Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier GmbH.
Références
BMJ Evid Based Med. 2022 Dec;27(6):334-344
pubmed: 35086864
F1000Res. 2020 Oct 2;9:1193
pubmed: 33082937
Mayo Clin Proc. 2013 Aug;88(8):790-8
pubmed: 23871230
Nat Med. 2021 Sep;27(9):1622-1628
pubmed: 34413518
Fam Med Community Health. 2021 Dec;9(4):
pubmed: 34924360
Clin Transl Gastroenterol. 2021 Feb 18;12(2):e00314
pubmed: 33620880
PLoS One. 2013;8(3):e59213
pubmed: 23516611
Ann Intern Med. 2021 Mar;174(3):335-343
pubmed: 33205991
Can J Cardiol. 2021 Sep;37(9):1353-1364
pubmed: 34077789
Nat Commun. 2021 Apr 15;12(1):2349
pubmed: 33859192
BMC Public Health. 2021 Nov 16;21(1):2103
pubmed: 34789188
Lancet Infect Dis. 2021 Oct;21(10):1365-1372
pubmed: 34051886
Science. 2022 Jan 14;375(6577):eabi9069
pubmed: 34855513
Future Healthc J. 2021 Jul;8(2):e243-e250
pubmed: 34286192
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2022 Jul 12;119(28):e2204074119
pubmed: 35867747
J Clin Epidemiol. 2022 Jan;141:46-53
pubmed: 34555426
Lancet. 2021 Oct 2;398(10307):1217-1229
pubmed: 34534517
J Ayurveda Integr Med. 2022 May 6;:100586
pubmed: 35541985
NPJ Vaccines. 2021 Feb 22;6(1):28
pubmed: 33619260
Eur Heart J. 2017 Aug 7;38(30):2349-2351
pubmed: 28810671
Nat Biotechnol. 2014 Jan;32(1):40-51
pubmed: 24406927
J Clin Epidemiol. 2009 May;62(5):499-505
pubmed: 19348976
BMJ. 2020 May 12;369:m1847
pubmed: 32398241
BMJ Open. 2021 Nov 22;11(11):e053096
pubmed: 34810189
Lancet. 2020 May 22;:
pubmed: 32450107
PLoS Med. 2016 Jun 21;13(6):e1002049
pubmed: 27328301
JAMA Netw Open. 2022 Dec 1;5(12):e2244495
pubmed: 36454571
Nature. 2020 Aug;584(7821):326
pubmed: 32812005
Lancet Infect Dis. 2022 Mar;22(3):341-348
pubmed: 34843662
N Engl J Med. 2021 Apr 22;384(16):1572-1573
pubmed: 33882210