Country Contribution to Investigators of Pivotal Clinical Trials and their Primary Publications of New Drugs Approved by the US Food and Drug Administration, 2012-2021.

IF 6.3 2区 医学 Q1 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics Pub Date : 2025-02-05 DOI:10.1002/cpt.3589
Yoona Choi, Jung-Hyun Won, Heeju Kim, YeSol Hong, Yujin Kim, Howard Lee
{"title":"Country Contribution to Investigators of Pivotal Clinical Trials and their Primary Publications of New Drugs Approved by the US Food and Drug Administration, 2012-2021.","authors":"Yoona Choi, Jung-Hyun Won, Heeju Kim, YeSol Hong, Yujin Kim, Howard Lee","doi":"10.1002/cpt.3589","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Pivotal clinical trials (PCTs) are often conducted across multiple nations and regions to achieve geographic, racial, or ethnic diversity. However, the diversity of PCT participants remains inadequate. PCTs for new drugs approved by the US Food and Drug Administration in 2012-2021 and their primary publications (PPub) were identified from the label and review documents. The country information about the PCT investigators and PPub authors were extracted from the PPubs or clinicaltrials.gov. The racial/ethnic diversity of PCT participants as reported in PPubs was assessed using the Diversity Index (DI). For 429 new drugs, 734 PCTs and 718 PPubs were identified. North America and Western Europe (NAWE) contributed the largest proportion of PCT investigators, PPub authors, and lead authors (62.9%, 81.7%, and 90.9%, respectively). Of 521 PPubs that reported the racial/ethnic distribution of PCT participants, the median DI was low at 0.33 (interquartile range 0.18-0.46) and only 16.3% PPubs had a DI >0.5. The number of PPub authors in non-NAWE and the number of countries of PPub authors in non-NAWE was significantly associated with the racial/ethnic diversity of PCT participants (OR 1.17 [95% CI 1.08-1.26] and OR 1.25 [1.08-1.46], respectively). Evidence generation for the regulatory approval of new drugs has been predominantly centered in NAWE. The dominance is even more pronounced in the authorship of PPubs. To improve the racial/ethnic diversity of PCT participants, investigators from non-NAWE countries should be encouraged to play more leadership roles, thereby increasing their likelihood of serving as authors in PPub.</p>","PeriodicalId":153,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cpt.3589","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Pivotal clinical trials (PCTs) are often conducted across multiple nations and regions to achieve geographic, racial, or ethnic diversity. However, the diversity of PCT participants remains inadequate. PCTs for new drugs approved by the US Food and Drug Administration in 2012-2021 and their primary publications (PPub) were identified from the label and review documents. The country information about the PCT investigators and PPub authors were extracted from the PPubs or clinicaltrials.gov. The racial/ethnic diversity of PCT participants as reported in PPubs was assessed using the Diversity Index (DI). For 429 new drugs, 734 PCTs and 718 PPubs were identified. North America and Western Europe (NAWE) contributed the largest proportion of PCT investigators, PPub authors, and lead authors (62.9%, 81.7%, and 90.9%, respectively). Of 521 PPubs that reported the racial/ethnic distribution of PCT participants, the median DI was low at 0.33 (interquartile range 0.18-0.46) and only 16.3% PPubs had a DI >0.5. The number of PPub authors in non-NAWE and the number of countries of PPub authors in non-NAWE was significantly associated with the racial/ethnic diversity of PCT participants (OR 1.17 [95% CI 1.08-1.26] and OR 1.25 [1.08-1.46], respectively). Evidence generation for the regulatory approval of new drugs has been predominantly centered in NAWE. The dominance is even more pronounced in the authorship of PPubs. To improve the racial/ethnic diversity of PCT participants, investigators from non-NAWE countries should be encouraged to play more leadership roles, thereby increasing their likelihood of serving as authors in PPub.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
12.70
自引率
7.50%
发文量
290
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics (CPT) is the authoritative cross-disciplinary journal in experimental and clinical medicine devoted to publishing advances in the nature, action, efficacy, and evaluation of therapeutics. CPT welcomes original Articles in the emerging areas of translational, predictive and personalized medicine; new therapeutic modalities including gene and cell therapies; pharmacogenomics, proteomics and metabolomics; bioinformation and applied systems biology complementing areas of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, human investigation and clinical trials, pharmacovigilence, pharmacoepidemiology, pharmacometrics, and population pharmacology.
期刊最新文献
The Role and Mechanisms of Aurora Kinases in Kidney Diseases. Country Contribution to Investigators of Pivotal Clinical Trials and their Primary Publications of New Drugs Approved by the US Food and Drug Administration, 2012-2021. Evolving Research and Development Landscape for Rare Diseases: Growing Concerns Over Orphan Drug Lag in Japan. CB1 Receptor Antagonist Selonabant (ANEB-001) Blocks Acute THC Effects in Healthy Volunteers: A Phase II Randomized Controlled Trial. Machine Learning for Prediction of Drug Concentrations: Application and Challenges.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1