Women In Clinical Trials Research Articles

Temporal Trends of Women Enrollment in Major Cardiovascular Randomized Clinical Trials

BackgroundAlthough it is known that women do not participate in trials as frequently as men, there are limited recent data examining how women recruitment has changed over time. MethodsWe conducted MEDLINE search using a validated strategy for randomized trials published in New England Journal of Medicine, Lancet, and Journal of the American Medical Association between 1986 and 2015, and included trials evaluating pharmacologic or nonpharmacologic therapies. We abstracted data on demographics, intervention type, clinical indication, and trial design characteristics, and examined their relationships with women enrollment. ResultsIn total, 598 trials met inclusion criteria. Women enrollment increased significantly over time (21% between 1986 and 1990 to 33% between 2011 and 2015; Pfor trend < 0.001) and did not differ by journal or funding source. Women enrollment varied with clinical indication, comprising 37% for non–coronary artery disease vascular trials, 30% for coronary artery disease trials, 28% for heart failure trials, and 28% for arrhythmia trials (P < 0.001), which were all significantly lower than the expected proportion in disease populations (P < 0.001). Women enrollment varied with trial type (31%, 29%, and 26% for pharmacologic, device, and procedural trials, respectively; P = 0.001). These findings were corroborated using multivariable analysis. We found significant positive correlations between women enrolled, and mean age and total number of participants. Fewer women were enrolled in trials reporting statistically significant results than those who did not (P = 0.001). ConclusionsAlthough enrollment of women has increased over time, it remains lower than the relative proportion in the disease population. Future studies should elucidate the reasons for persistent under-representation of women in clinical trials.

Gender aspects in angioedema

Angioedema can be triggered by mediators bradykinin or histamine. Gender-specific differences and potential biomarkers for follow-up/therapy monitoring are mostly unknown. To what extent are gender-related defects, prodromes, trigger factors, clinical parameters such as number of attacks, frequency, localization, laboratory values, hormones and response to therapy different for the variant types of angioedema. A literature search was performed in PubMed with the keywords "angioedema" and "sex" or "gender" as well as targeted screening of reviews, guidelines and registration studies with angioedema-relevant drugs. In histamine-mediated angioedema, there are few gender-specific differences. In bradykinin-mediated hereditary angioedema, especially with factor XII mutation, but also in angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor-induced angioedema, women are more frequent, more affected and hormonal influences are documented. The localization of bradykinin-mediated hereditary angioedema (HAE) is also gender specific. The proportion of women in clinical trials for HAE therapies is about two-thirds. Principally, differentiating between estrogen-dependent, estrogen-sensitive and estrogen-insensitive angioedema seems reasonable. The characterization of these subgroups may lead to abetter understanding of the pathomechanism of the hormone effects on angioedema. This could lead to the development of urgently needed biomarkers for faster and more targeted diagnosis and prediction of attacks, to significantly improve the health and quality of life of angioedema patients by means of individualized gender-specific therapy.

Mechanisms of Sex Disparities in Cardiovascular Function and Remodeling.

Epidemiological studies demonstrate disparities between men and women in cardiovascular disease prevalence, clinical symptoms, treatments, and outcomes. Enrollment of women in clinical trials is lower than men, and experimental studies investigating molecular mechanisms and efficacy of certain therapeutics in cardiovascular disease have been primarily conducted in male animals. These practices bias data interpretation and limit the implication of research findings in female clinical populations. This review will focus on the biological origins of sex differences in cardiovascular physiology, health, and disease, with an emphasis on the sex hormones, estrogen and testosterone. First, we will briefly discuss epidemiological evidence of sex disparities in cardiovascular disease prevalence and clinical manifestation. Second, we will describe studies suggesting sexual dimorphism in normal cardiovascular function from fetal life to older age. Third, we will summarize and critically discuss the current literature regarding the molecular mechanisms underlying the effects of estrogens and androgens on cardiac and vascular physiology and the contribution of these hormones to sex differences in cardiovascular disease. Fourth, we will present cardiovascular disease risk factors that are positively associated with the female sex, and thus, contributing to increased cardiovascular risk in women. We conclude that inclusion of both men and women in the investigation of the role of estrogens and androgens in cardiovascular physiology will advance our understanding of the mechanisms underlying sex differences in cardiovascular disease. In addition, investigating the role of sex-specific factors in the development of cardiovascular disease will reduce sex and gender disparities in the treatment and diagnosis of cardiovascular disease. © 2019 American Physiological Society. Compr Physiol 9:375-411, 2019.

Increasing the Participation of Pregnant Women in Clinical Trials

Increasing the Participation of Pregnant Women in Clinical Trials

Disadvantaged, outnumbered, and discouraged: women’s experiences as healthy volunteers in U.S. Phase I trials

ABSTRACTWhile enormous strides have been made in the representation of women in clinical trials, the percentage of women enrolling in Phase I trials still remains low, which both raises public health concerns about the safety of new drugs and social justice concerns regarding their inclusion in research. As part of a longitudinal study of healthy volunteers in the United States, our inquiry aimed to examine impediments to women enrolling in Phase I trials as well as their experiences participating in these studies at residential research clinics. We analyzed 111 semi-structured interviews conducted with 47 women who had enrolled in at least one Phase I trial. Our study indicates that women face discrimination during all stages of their participation in Phase I trials from their ability to qualify for studies, the treatment they receive in the clinic facilities, and a lack of social support. Specifically, we found that (1) study designs disadvantage participants of childbearing potential, (2) women feel vulnerable in the clinic space when outnumbered by men, and (3) heterosexual women are often discouraged from participation by their husbands or significant others. Placing these findings within the scholarly literature on barriers to women’s clinical trial participation, we argue that diverse strategies attending both to physiological and social factors are needed to combat inequalities in U.S. Phase I trial participation.

Working Together to Address Women's Health in Research and Drug Development: Summary of the 2017 Women's Health Congress Preconference Symposium.

Historically, women have been underrepresented in clinical research, requiring physicians to extrapolate medical recommendations for women from clinical research done in cohorts consisting predominantly of male participants. While government-funded clinical research has achieved gender parity in phase-3 clinical trials across many biomedical disciplines, improvements are still needed in several facets of women's health research, such as the inclusion of women in early-phase clinical trials, the inclusion of pregnant women and women with physical and intellectual disabilities, the consideration of sex as a biological variable in preclinical research, and the analysis and reporting of sex and gender differences across the full biomedical research continuum. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) Office of Research on Women's Health and the Office of Women's Health of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) cosponsored a preconference symposium at the 25th Annual Women's Health Congress, held in Arlington, VA in April, 2017, to highlight gains made and remaining needs regarding the representation of women in clinical research, to introduce innovative procedures and technologies, and to outline revised policy for future studies. Six speakers presented information on a range of subjects related to the representation of women in clinical research and federal initiatives to advance precision medicine. Topics included the following: the return on investment from the NIH-funded Women's Health Initiative; progress in including women in clinical trials for FDA-approved drugs and products; the importance of clinical trials in pregnant women; FDA initiatives to report drug safety during pregnancy; the NIH-funded All of Us Research Program; and efforts to enhance FDA transparency and communications, including the introduction of Drug Trials Snapshots. This article summarizes the major points of the presentations and the discussions that followed.

Gender Differences in Ischemic Cardiomyopathy.

Cardiovascular disease remains the leading cause of death among women globally, majority of which are due to ischemic heart disease. Despite the recent advances in the overall management of CVD, there are unique challenges in the diagnosis and management of women as well as poorer outcomes. Women with ischemic cardiomyopathy experience significant morbidity and mortality. Differences in underlying pathology, delays in presentation, diagnosis, and treatment as well as the under-representation of women in clinical trials contribute to these poor outcomes. In this review, we discuss the nuances of gender-specific differences in the burden, clinical presentation, and outcomes of ischemic cardiomyopathy in women, in addition to discussion of areas needing further research.

Gender differences in Egyptian patients hospitalized with heart failure: insights from the European Society of Cardiology Heart Failure Long-Term Registry.

AimsThis analysis evaluates gender differences in the Egyptian cohort of patients hospitalized for acute heart failure (AHF) in the European Society of Cardiology Heart Failure Long‐Term Registry.Methods and resultsFrom April 2011 to September 2014, 1634 patients hospitalized with AHF were enrolled by 20 hospitals all over Egypt. Of these patients, 1112 (68%) patients were male and 522 (32%) were female. Women presented with a higher admission systolic blood pressure and resting heart rate. Compared with men, women had a higher body mass index (32.5 ± 9.0 vs. 29.3 ± 4.9, P < 0.001), more frequent atrial fibrillation (34.7% vs. 22.4%, P < 0.001), and anaemia defined by haemoglobin < 12 g/dL (83.1% vs. 58.4%, P < 0.001). Women were more likely to present with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (29.7% vs. 10.6%, P < 0.001). Women had more frequent diabetes mellitus (48.1% vs. 41.6%, P < 0.05) and hypertension (48.7% vs. 39.3%, P < 0.001) than had men, whereas smoking was rare among them (8.8% vs. 82.9%, P < 0.005). There was no significant difference in the primary aetiology of heart failure between both sexes. ACE inhibitors, beta‐blockers, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, antiplatelets, statins, and nitrates were less frequently prescribed to women, whereas they more often received digoxin, amiodarone, anticoagulants, and calcium channel blockers. There was no significant difference in in‐hospital (5.7% vs. 4.6%, P = 0.39) and 1 year mortality (27.9% vs. 25.9%, P = 0.48) between women and men, respectively.ConclusionsMen and women with AHF differ significantly in baseline clinical characteristics and management but not in adverse outcomes. These findings emphasize the importance of individualized management and need for more comprehensive recruitment of women in clinical trials.

Gender differences in clinical registration trials: is there a real problem?

AimsSeveral studies have reported the under‐representation of women in clinical trials, thereby challenging the external validity of the benefit/risk assessments of launched drugs. Our aim was to determine the extent to which women have been included in clinical trials used for drug registration and to analyse the fraction of women participating in phases I, II and III.MethodsWe conducted cross‐sectional, structured research into publicly available registration dossiers of Food and Drug Administration (FDA)‐approved drugs that are prescribed frequently. Furthermore, we analysed compounds with high hepatic clearance and a known gender‐related difference in drug response. In a sensitivity analysis, we compared figures with US disease prevalence data.ResultsFor 38 of the initial 137 drugs (28%), sufficient data were reported and publicly available. For these drugs, 185 479 trial participants were included, of whom 47% were female and 44% were male; gender was not reported for 9% of participants. However, the number of female participants varied with the phase of the trial, with 22% females in phase I trials vs. 48% and 49%, respectively, in phase II and III trials. When compared with US disease prevalence data, 10 drugs (26%) had a greater than 20% difference between the proportion of females affected with the disease compared with representation in clinical trials.ConclusionsFrom these publicly available data, there was no evidence of any systematic under‐representation of women in clinical trials.

Sex-related differences in chronic heart failure

The prevalence of chronic heart failure (CHF) is steadily increasing. Both sexes are affected, with significant differences in etiology, epidemiology and clinical presentation, prognosis, comorbidities, and response to treatment. Women tend to develop CHF at a more advanced age, present more often with HF with preserved ejection fraction, are more symptomatic, and have a worse quality of life than men, but also a better prognosis. In women, CHF has more frequently a non-ischemic etiology, and arterial hypertension and diabetes mellitus are leading comorbidities. Furthermore, many sex-related differences have been detected in the response to treatment, for example a greater prognostic benefit from angiotensin-receptor blockers in women, a higher incidence of complications after defibrillator implantation, and a greater response to cardiac resynchronization therapy. Furthermore, women are less likely to receive defibrillator therapy or heart transplantation. The significant underrepresentation of women in clinical trials limits our capacity to evaluate the extent of sex-related differences in CHF, although their characterization seems crucial in order to achieve the ultimate goal of a tailored therapy for this condition.

Sex differences in heart failure.

Heart failure (HF) numbers continue to grow in the United States and approximately 50% of patients living with HF are women. For the provider, it is critical to understand the role that gender plays in recognition, diagnosis, and management. The purpose of this literature review is to highlight the prevalence of heart failure in women and discuss gender variations in epidemiology, symptoms, pharmacology, and treatment as well as examine the representation of women in clinical trials.

Fair inclusion of pregnant women in clinical trials: an integrated scientific and ethical approach

BackgroundSince pregnant women are severely underrepresented in clinical research, many take the position that the exclusion of pregnant women from research must be justified unless there are compelling “scientific reasons” for their exclusion. However, it is questionable whether this approach renders research with pregnant women fair. This paper analyzes and evaluates when research with pregnant women can be considered as fair and what constitutes scientific reasons for exclusion.MethodsConceptual ethical and methodological analysis and evaluation of fair inclusion.ResultsFair inclusion of pregnant women means (1) that pregnant women who are eligible are not excluded solely for being pregnant and (2) that the research interests of pregnant women are prioritized, meaning that they ought to receive substantially more attention. Fairness does not imply that pregnant women should be included in virtually every research project, as including only a few pregnant women in a population consisting only of women will not help to determine the effectiveness and safety of a treatment in pregnant women. Separate trials in pregnant women may be preferable once we assume, or know, that effects of interventions in pregnant women differ from the effects in other subpopulations, or when we assume, or know, that there are no differences. In the latter case, it may be preferable to conduct post-marketing studies or establish registries. If there is no conclusive evidence indicating either differences or equivalence of effects between pregnant and non-pregnant women, yet it seems unlikely that major differences or exact equivalence exist, the inclusion of pregnant women should be sufficient. Depending on the research question, this boils down to representativeness in terms of the proportion of pregnant and non-pregnant women, or to oversampling pregnant women.ConclusionsFair inclusion of pregnant women in research implies that separate trials in pregnant women should be promoted. Inclusion of pregnant women has to be realized at the earliest phases of the research process. In addition to researchers and research ethics committees, scientific advisory councils, funders, drug regulatory agencies, pharmaceutical companies, journal editors and others have a joint responsibility to further develop the evidence base for drug use in pregnant women.

Inclusion of pregnant and breastfeeding women in research - efforts and initiatives.

Pregnant and breastfeeding women have been rendered therapeutic orphans as they have been historically excluded from clinical trials. Labelling for most approved drugs does not provide information about safety and efficacy during pregnancy. This lack of data is mainly due to ethico-legal challenges that have remained entrenched in the post-diethylstilbestrol and thalidomide era, and that have led to pregnancy being viewed in the clinical trial setting primarily through a pharmacovigilance lens. Policy considerations that encourage and/or require the inclusion of pregnant or lactating women in clinical trials may address the current lack of available information. However, there are additional pragmatic strategies, such the employment of pharmacometric tools and the introduction of innovative clinical trial designs, which could improve knowledge about the safety and efficacy of medication use during pregnancy and lactation. This paper provides a broad overview of the pharmacoepidemiology of drugs used during pregnancy and lactation, and offers recommendations for regulators and researchers in academia and industry to increase the available pharmacokinetic and -dynamic understanding of medication use in pregnancy.

Representation of Women and Minorities in Clinical Trials for New Molecular Entities and Original Therapeutic Biologics Approved by FDA CDER from 2013 to 2015.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has made efforts to encourage adequate assessment of women, racial/ethnic minorities, and geriatric participants in clinical trials through regulations and guidance documents. This study surveyed the demographics of clinical trial participants and the presence of efficacy and safety analyses by sex for new drugs approved between 2013 and 2015 by the FDA Center for Drug Evaluation and Research. New drug marketing applications submitted to FDA were surveyed for demographic data (sex, race, ethnicity, and age) and the presence of sex-based analyses for efficacy and safety. The Ratio of the Proportion of women in clinical trials for the indicated disease population relative to the estimated Proportion of women in the disease population (PPR) was calculated for new drug indications. Of the 102 new drugs in this cohort (defined as new molecular entity drugs and original therapeutic biologics), sex was reported for >99.9% of trial participants, and women accounted for 40.4% of these participants. An estimated 77.2% of participants were White, 6.4% were Black/African American, and 29.1% were aged ≥65 years. Sex-based analyses for both efficacy and safety were conducted for 93.1% of applications. PPR was calculated for 82 new drugs for a total of 60 indications, of which 50 indications (83.3%) had a PPR ≥0.80. Sex data are now collected for almost all study participants, and this study shows appropriate sex participation for most new drugs when estimated disease prevalence by sex (PPR) is considered. Therapeutic area and disease indication are important considerations when assessing the sex of participants because variation occurs depending on the disease under study. Some racial minorities, especially Blacks/African Americans, are still not well represented in most drug development programs and remain an area where improvement is needed.

Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease in Women.

Cardiovascular diseases are the leading cause of morbidity and mortality among women worldwide. The pathophysiological basis of cardiovascular health among men and women is not identical. This leads to variable cardiovascular responses to stimulus and presentation of cardiovascular disease symptoms, both of which can have a direct effect on treatment outcomes. Traditionally, the enrollment of women in clinical trials has been minimal, resulting in a lack of gender-specific analysis of clinical trial data and, therefore, the absence of concrete risk factor assessment among women. However, scientific progress in the past decade has identified a spectrum of risk factors for cardiovascular diseases that may be specific to women. These risk factors, which may include menopause, hypertensive disease of pregnancy, and depression, confer additional risk in women besides the traditional risk factors. The current state of knowledge and awareness about these risk factors is suboptimal at this time. Therefore, although the treatment of cardiovascular diseases is similar in both genders, appropriate risk stratification may be limited in women compared to men. The purpose of this review is to describe the recent trends in identifying female-specific risk factors for cardiovascular diseases, their utility in risk stratification, and current pharmacological options for women with regard to cardiovascular disease prevention.

Treatment and Response to Statins: Gender-related Differences.

Response to drug administration is a primary determinant for treatment success. Sex and gender disparities play a role in determining the efficacy and safety of the most commonly used medications suggesting the need for a sex-tailored approach in prescription. Statins are a cost-effective strategy for cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention. While statins are similarly effective in secondary CVD prevention, some concerns raised by conflicting data reported in primary CVD prevention clinical trials. The small representation of women in clinical trials and the fewer rates of events due to the lower female baseline CVD risk may have conditioned contradictory meta-analysis findings. Specifically, benefits outweigh disadvantages of statin therapy in women with a high CVD risk, while several doubts exist for the primary prevention of women at low-intermediate CVD risk. Furthermore, disparities between women and men in medication adherence may influence statin efficacy in CVD prevention. The sex-dependent impact of adverse side effects is one of the reasons advocated for explaining the gender gap, but it is not evidence-proved. The present review summarizes the sex and gender differences in the use of statins, pointing out new perspectives and opening issues in sex-tailored CVD prevention strategy.

Stroke in women - from evidence to inequalities.

Stroke is the second largest cause of disability-adjusted life-years lost worldwide. The prevalence of stroke in women is predicted to rise rapidly, owing to the increasing average age of the global female population. Vascular risk factors differ between women and men in terms of prevalence, and evidence increasingly supports the clinical importance of sex differences in stroke. The influence of some risk factors for stroke - including diabetes mellitus and atrial fibrillation - are stronger in women, and hypertensive disorders of pregnancy also affect the risk of stroke decades after pregnancy. However, in an era of evidence-based medicine, women are notably under-represented in clinical trials - despite governmental actions highlighting the need to include both men and women in clinical trials - resulting in a reduced generalizability of study results to women. The aim of this Review is to highlight new insights into specificities of stroke in women, to plan future research priorities, and to influence public health policies to decrease the worldwide burden of stroke in women.

Sex and gender differences in hypertensive kidney injury.

Hypertension is a complex, multifaceted disorder, affecting ~1 in 3 adults in the United States. Although hypertension occurs in both men and women, there are distinct sex differences in the way in which they develop hypertension, with women having a lower incidence of hypertension until the sixth decade of life. Despite observed sex differences in hypertension, little is known about the molecular mechanisms underlying the development of hypertension in females, primarily because of their underrepresentation in both clinical and experimental animal studies. The first goal of this review is to provide a concise overview of the participation of women in clinical trials, including a discussion of the importance of including females in basic science research, as recently mandated by the National Institutes of Health. The remaining portion of the review is dedicated to identifying clinical and experimental animal studies that concentrate on gender and sex differences in hypertensive kidney disease, ending with a proposed role for T cells in mediating sex differences in blood pressure.

The Safety of Medications in Pregnant Women: An Opportunity to Use Database Studies.

* Abbreviations: FDA — : Food and Drug Administration NAAEDR — : North American Antiepileptic Drug Registry Information on the safety of medications that pregnant women may need is key to protecting the health of the woman and her fetus. When new drugs are first marketed, this information is scarce, because pregnant women are generally excluded from randomized clinical trials. Broader inclusion of pregnant women in clinical research is being discussed by regulatory authorities and funders.1 But even with greater inclusion of pregnant women in clinical trials, safety data from those trials would be limited by the combination of study size, low frequency of many key outcomes, and strict conditions for enrollment. Postapproval observational studies still would be needed to assess drug safety in routine health care. These assessments can be conducted as pregnancy exposure registries or by using existing health databases. Currently, because of our overreliance on pregnancy exposure registries and underuse of database studies, we are missing an opportunity to provide information that would help women and their physicians make better informed decisions about treatment in pregnancy. Pregnancy exposure registries, usually sponsored by a single pharmaceutical company, are a primary method requested by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for postapproval safety studies in pregnant women.2 However, these registries often fail to enroll a sufficient number of exposed pregnancies, and when they do, it is often difficult to interpret results because they generally do not include an internal comparison cohort and rely on comparisons to external data sources, such as the Metropolitan Atlanta Congenital Defects Program.2 The pregnancy registries that have been most successful in enrolling … Address correspondence to Andrea V. Margulis, MD, ScD, RTI Health Solutions, Diagonal 605, 9-1, 08028 Barcelona, Spain. E-mail: amargulis{at}rti.org

Effects of obesogenic diet and estradiol on dorsal raphe gene expression in old female macaques.

The beneficial effects of bioidentical ovarian steroid hormone therapy (HT) during the perimenopause are gaining recognition. However, the positive effects of estrogen (E) plus or minus progesterone (P) administration to ovariectomized (Ovx) lab animals were recognized in multiple systems for years before clinical trials could adequately duplicate the results. Moreover, very large numbers of women are often needed to find statistically significant results in clinical trials of HT; and there are still opposing results being published, especially in neural and cardiovascular systems. One of the obvious differences between human and animal studies is diet. Laboratory animals are fed a diet that is low in fat and refined sugar, but high in micronutrients. In the US, a large portion of the population eats what is known as a “western style diet” or WSD that provides calories from 36% fat, 44% carbohydrates (includes 18.5% sugars) and 18% protein. Unfortunately, obesity and diabetes have reached epidemic proportions and the percentage of obese women in clinical trials may be overlooked. We questioned whether WSD and obesity could decrease the positive neural effects of estradiol (E) in the serotonin system of old macaques that were surgically menopausal. Old ovo-hysterectomized female monkeys were fed WSD for 2.5 years, and treated with placebo, Immediate E (ImE) or Delayed E (DE). Compared to old Ovx macaques on primate chow and treated with placebo or E, the WSD-fed monkeys exhibited greater individual variance and blunted responses to E-treatment in the expression of genes related to serotonin neurotransmission, CRH components in the midbrain, synapse assembly, DNA repair, protein folding, ubiquitylation, transport and neurodegeneration. For many of the genes examined, transcript abundance was lower in WSD-fed than chow-fed monkeys. In summary, an obesogenic diet for 2.5 years in old surgically menopausal macaques blunted or increased variability in E-induced gene expression in the dorsal raphe. These results suggest that with regard to function and viability in the dorsal raphe, HT may not be as beneficial for obese women as normal weight women.