Abstract
Background Early in the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, commentators warned that some COVID trials were inadequately conceived, designed and reported. Here, we retrospectively assess the prevalence of informative COVID trials launched in the first 6 months of the pandemic.
Methods We created a cohort of SARS-CoV-2 treatment and prevention efficacy trials that were initiated from 2020-01-01 to 2020-06-30 using ClinicalTrials.gov registration records. We evaluated trials on 3 criteria of informativeness: potential redundancy, design quality and feasibility of patient-participant recruitment. The study protocol was prospectively registered with the Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/fp726/).
Results We included 500 trials in our cohort, 58% of which were Phase 2 and 84.8% were directed towards the treatment of SARS-CoV-2. Close to one third of trials met all three criteria and were deemed informative (29.0% (95% Confidence Interval 23.7 – 36.9)). The proportion of potentially redundant trials in our cohort was 4.1%. Over half of the trials in our cohort (56.2%) did not meet our criteria for high quality trial design. The proportion of trials with infeasible patient-participant recruitment was 22.6%.
Conclusions Less than one third of COVID-19 trials registered on ClinicalTrials.gov during the first six months met all three criteria for informativeness. Shortcomings in trial design, recruitment feasibility and redundancy reflect longstanding weaknesses in the clinical research enterprise that were likely amplified by the exceptional circumstances of a pandemic.
Competing Interest Statement
Marcin Waligora reports personal fees from Advisory Bioethics Council, Sanofi outside the submitted work. Other authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Funding Statement
This study was funded by the National Science Center, Poland, UMO 2020/01/0/HS1/00024 (www.ncn.gov.pl). Authors received the funding: MW, KK. The funder had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Our study was not subject to Institutional Review Board approval, as it relies on publicly accessible data and did not involve interaction with research participants.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
The datasets generated and analysed during the current study are available in the Open Science Framework repository, https://osf.io/fp726/.
