Global Variations in Patient Populations and Outcomes in Heart Failure Clinical Trials

Abstract

Heart failure is a global pandemic and there has been a growing effort to enroll patients from different geographical regions in randomized controlled trials. In this review, we examined regional variation in both patient characteristics and outcomes among several of the most recent global heart failure trials RECENT FINDINGS: Retrospective analyses of global heart failure trials have identified marked variations in both baseline characteristics and management of heart failure by region of enrollment. In some trials, this variation has been significant enough to cause differential treatment effects. We summarized key heterogeneity observed in global heart failure clinical trials. Differences in both patient population and organization of these trials abroad pose an important challenge in making interpretations and country-level decisions. As such, we encourage a concerted effort to account for these differences in future research.

Outcome Measures and Inclusion/Exclusion Criteria in Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Trials on ClinicalTrials.gov

“…Past studies have examined the differences in inclusion criteria across clinical trials for atopic dermatitis, heart failure, and pneumonia. 8-10…”

“…Past studies have examined the differences in inclusion criteria across clinical trials for atopic dermatitis, heart failure, and pneumonia. [8][9][10] Among trials that utilized minimum IPSS as inclusion criteria, 35% utilized an IPSS of 13 or greater. The continuous outcome obtained from the IPSS can be categorized into symptom severity grades including mild, moderate, and severe, which correspond to IPSS values of 0-7, 8-19, and 20-35.…”

Nanoparticle-Mediated Drug Delivery for Treatment of Ischemic Heart Disease

“…Traditional clinical approaches for myocardial infarction rely on surgical revascularization procedures, such as coronary stenting or coronary artery bypass grafts (CABG). Although the novel therapeutics using cells (especially stem cells) ( Gao et al, 2013 ; Madigan and Atoui, 2018 ; Terashvili and Bosnjak, 2019 ), genes ( Oggu et al, 2017 ), exosomes ( Davidson and Yellon, 2018 ), and growth factors ( Crafts et al, 2015 ; Reboucas et al, 2016 ) are emerging and have shown significant research outcomes, numerous challenges still exist in translating those technologies into clinical practice ( Egwim et al, 2017 ).…”