Acronyms of clinical trials

Introduction Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death for women worldwide. Yet, women are often underrepresented in clinical trials of cardiovascular disease compared to population prevalence. Reasons for underrepresentation are multifactorial, and often attributed to trial criteria. Yet, women may also decide not to participate for more subconscious reasons, such as the perception of the trial acronym. Trial acronyms are used in patient communication and are often chosen to have a certain meaning, which can be perceived as gendered. We hypothesize that masculine trial names are associated with underrepresentation of women in clinical trials. Purpose To investigate if the perceived gender of the trial acronym, and other study characteristics affect the representation of women in cardiovascular clinical trials. Methods We performed a systematic search of ClinicalTrials.gov to collect information on randomized clinical trials testing drug interventions for cardiovascular disease. We extracted trial characteristics and acronyms from primary outcome publications. We conducted a survey among 148 cardiovascular patients (both women and men) recruited via an online patient forum and asked them whether they perceived trial acronyms names as more masculine, feminine or neutral. We defined female underrepresentation as those trials where the proportion of included women divided by the proportion of women in the disease population was below 0.8. We analyzed female underrepresentation and study setting, participant characteristics, and female first and last authorship. Results We identified 148 eligible clinical trials of which 29.9% of participants were women. Women were underrepresented in 61.5% of trials (Figure 1). Only 45.3% of publications reported sex-stratified results. The proportion of trials in which women were underrepresented increased between 1992 and 2022 from 48.3% to 70.5%. A total of 148 patients (67.6% women, mean age 61 y) evaluated the trial acronyms for their perceived gender. The majority (70.9%) of trial names was perceived as neutral, 17.6% as masculine and 11.5% as feminine. Female representation was not associated with the perceived gender of the trial name (OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.63 – 1.35) (Figure 2A). Trials had a higher odds of female underrepresentation if they recruited at an in-patient setting (OR 2.47, 95% CI 1.14 – 5.58), or if their participants were in the second-highest age group between 64.0 and 66.3 years (OR 3.93, 95% CI 1.25 – 14.18). Trials had lower odds of female underrepresentation if the last author was a woman (OR 0.10, 95% CI 0.01 – 0.49). Conclusion Female representation in cardiovascular clinical trials remains poor but is not depending on the perceived gender of the trial acronym. Female representation varies with recruitment type, participant age and last author gender, which are important starting points to improve participation rates of women.

CALORIE is a better acronym than CALERIE

Acronymic trials: the good, the bad, and the coercive

Clinical trial registration should also include trial acronyms

Mentor for MENTOR

HomeCirculationVol. 104, No. 20RENAISSANCE, RECOVER, and RENEWAL: The 3 Rs Free AccessLetterPDF/EPUBAboutView PDFView EPUBSections ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload citationsTrack citationsPermissions ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InMendeleyReddit Jump toFree AccessLetterPDF/EPUBRENAISSANCE, RECOVER, and RENEWAL: The 3 Rs Tsung O. Cheng, MD Tsung O. ChengTsung O. Cheng Professor of Medicine, The George Washington University, Washington, DC Search for more papers by this author Originally published13 Nov 2001https://doi.org/10.1161/circ.104.20.e108Circulation. 2001;104:e108To the Editor:I was surprised to see Parmley in his recent editorial1 referring to 3 etanercept trials by their acronyms (RENAISSANCE, RECOVER, and RENEWAL) without defining them. Commenting on my article on acronyms of cardiological trials in 1996,2 Parmley lamented in his editorial “TOTAL ABC CHAOS”3 that “readers, investigators and archivists may find the enigmatic collection of acronyms to be a hopeless puzzle, especially because each new trial brings a new and usually more creative acronym.” Unfortunately, Parmley finally succumbed to the acronymophilia fever, too.4For those readers who may feel frustrated by not knowing what the 3 Rs are, I wish to come to their help. RENAISSANCE stands for “Randomized Etanercept North AmerIcan Strategy to Study AntagoNism of CytokinEs,” RECOVER stands for “Research into Etanercept: CytOkine antagonism in VEntriculaR dysfunction,” and RENEWAL stands for “Randomized EtaNErcept Worldwide evALuation.”5 References 1 Parmley WW. How many medicines do patients with heart failure need? Circulation. 2001; 103: 1611–1612.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar2 Cheng TO. Acronyms of clinical trials in cardiology–1996. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1996; 27: 1293–1305.MedlineGoogle Scholar3 Parmley WW. TOTAL ABC CHAOS. >J Am Coll Cardiol. 1996; 27: 1292.CrossrefGoogle Scholar4 Cheng TO. Acronymophilia: the exponential growth of the use of acronyms should be resisted. BMJ. 1994; 309: 683–684.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar5 Young JB. Heart failure is a fever: the cytokine connection. Cleve Clin J Med. 2000; 67: 801–803.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar Previous Back to top Next FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails November 13, 2001Vol 104, Issue 20 Advertisement Article InformationMetrics https://doi.org/10.1161/circ.104.20.e108PMID: 11705838 Originally publishedNovember 13, 2001 PDF download Advertisement

The use of acronyms to name clinical trials, some of which might be manipulative or even coercive, is increasingly popular yet controversial. We aimed to evaluate whether trial acronyms are associated with appealing linguistic cues born of marketing psychology using trade names of perfumes. The proportion of trials (730 clinical trials) titled with an acronym was 61%. Among acronym-named trials, 70% have matching trade names of perfumes, i.e., – alluring names. Industry-sponsored trials were more likely to use acronyms (OR 1.61; 95% CI 1.15–2.26; p = 0.006) and alluring acronyms (OR 2.58; 95% CI 1.61–4.12; p < 0.001). During the period from 2000 to 2020, the proportion of alluring trials increased both for industry and academic funding, from 50% to 77% and from 0% to 57% , respectively. Also, trials with alluring acronyms were cited more often (relative rate of citation, 1.37; 95% CI 1.13–1.66; p = 0.001). The growing use of acronyms coincides with a noticeable increase in manipulative names. Through overt or subliminal enticement, inspirational acronyms that downplay the risks or raise expectations to patients with life-threatening illnesses, may exert undue influence. The observed relationship between manipulative acronyms and sponsorship by the pharmaceutical industry enhances this concern.

Another ERICA trial?

604 Long Term Follow-Up of Implantable Loop Recorders: Prolonging Observation Period Increases Diagnostic Yield?

Acute tonsillitis tends to recur. In cases where patients do not meet the Paradise criteria, the possibilities of non-surgical treatment are more often considered. The objective of this study was to evaluate the therapeutic efficacy during the long-term follow-up and the effect on the recurrence of the phytoneering extract BNO 1030 (Imupret®) in patients with acute non-bacterial tonsillitis.MethodsIn this Randomized, Open-Label, Multicentre, Comparative Study, 238 outpatients aged 6–18 years were randomized to receive either BNO 1030 (Imupret®) for 4 weeks in addition to standard symptomatic treatment, or to receive standard treatment. Evaluation criteria: reduction in the symptom severity less than 1 point, the number of tonsillitis recurrences at each control point after 3, 6 and 12 months during the one-year follow-up.ResultsA significant reduction in the severity of local symptoms and the general condition at each control point within the year of follow-up and a significant decrease (by 66.56%) in the recurrence rate of tonsillitis were noted. The anti-recurrent action was manifested during within the year of follow-up. All patients tolerated phytotherapy well; no adverse reactions were noted.ConclusionsBNO 1030 (Imupret®) is a safe and effective medicinal product for acute non-bacterial tonsillitis in children aged 6–18 years. In addition to the main symptomatic treatment, it leads to a significant reduction in the clinical manifestations and the number of recurrences of tonsillitis within the year of follow-up.Trial registrationThis trial was registered in German Clinical Trials Register retrospectively on June 27, 2018.Trial Acronym: ATi-1DRKS-ID: DRKS00015020

Background: Clinical trial registries were established to improve the transparency and completeness of clinical trial reporting and a number of policies have been introduced to encourage or mandate their use. While prospective trial registration has been endorsed in Australia, there is currently no legal requirement for researchers to register or communicate findings from clinical trials. There has also been, to the best of our knowledge, no analysis previously undertaken on publication rates for clinical trials performed in Australia. Aim: We aimed to determine the proportion of clinical trials that remain 'unpublished' in Victoria, Australia´s second most populous state, between 2009 and 2013. Methods: We used data reported to Cancer Council Victoria's Cancer Trials Management Scheme (CTMS) between 2009 and 2013, to identify trials that had recruited a new patient or recorded any follow-up patient activity in the specified time period. Using this data, we conducted a systematic search of ClinicalTrials.gov , the Australia and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR), PubMed and Google for records of the trial. Trial registration numbers, acronyms and scientific titles were used as primary search terms. Results were characterized by type of publication (i.e., whether it was an accredited scientific paper or other) and source location. Results: Of the trials reported to the CTMS between 2009 and 2013, 777 trials were included in this investigation; the majority (58.8%) were randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Compared with previously published findings, communication of trial results in this study was high; 70% of trials published results in an accredited scientific journal and a further 10% in alternate form, such as a conference abstract or media release. Publication rates were higher for trials with a commercial sponsor (85%) compared with trials sponsored by a cooperative group (77%). Nearly 8% of trials in this study had not been registered on an international clinical trials register. Only 39% of unregistered trials had published results. Of the registered trials, those registered on ClinicalTrials.gov were more likely to be published (86%) compared with trials listed on ANZCTR (68%). Between 2009 and 2013 , 8% of trials registered on ClinicalTrials.gov , in our data set, were terminated; 70% of these trials published results. Conclusion: Although the rate at which clinical trial findings were published in Victoria was higher in this investigation compared with equivalent overseas data, trials registered on ClinicalTrials.gov were more likely to publish results than unregistered trials or trials registered on ANZCTR. This suggests a potential need for trial registration and publication guidelines in Australia, similar to that of the United States where the requirements and procedures for submitting registration and summary result information for clinical trials on ClinicalTrials.gov have been compulsory for the last decade.

Acronyms of clinical trials in cardiology—1994

No success with the SUCCESS trial

Acronyms of clinical trials in cardiology—1998

Journal Article Acronyms of clinical trials in cardiology Get access TSUNG O. CHENG TSUNG O. CHENG The George Washington UniversityWashington DC. U.S.A. Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic PubMed Google Scholar European Heart Journal, Volume 14, Issue 12, December 1993, Page 1725, https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/14.12.1725 Published: 01 December 1993