Evidence‐based data for newly approved medications' use in older adults: An analysis from clinical trials to monographs

Author:

Gosselin Maude1ORCID,Baroud Marie‐Laure2,Denis Odélie‐Rose2,Gagnon Marie‐Eve23ORCID,Sirois Caroline2456ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Social and Preventive Medicine, Faculty of Medicine Université Laval Quebec Quebec Canada

2. Faculty of Pharmacy Université Laval Quebec Quebec Canada

3. Department of Health Sciences Université du Québec à Rimouski Rimouski Quebec Canada

4. Centre d'excellence sur le vieillissement de Québec Quebec Quebec Canada

5. VITAM, Sustainable Health Research Centre Quebec Quebec Canada

6. CHU de Québec‐Université Laval Research Centre Quebec Quebec Canada

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundOlder adults have historically been excluded from clinical trials, limiting evidence‐based data. An updated picture of the situation with newly marketed medications is needed. We aimed to describe (1) the recommendations specific to older adults in monographs of newly marketed medications; (2) the representation of older adults in clinical trials of those medications.MethodsIn November 2020, we listed all medications that received a notice of compliance from Health Canada between January 2006 and September 2020, excluding those with indications irrelevant to community‐dwelling older adults and locally acting medications. We assessed the availability and clarity of recommendations in monographs regarding older adults. Using Clinicaltrials.gov, we identified randomized controlled double‐blind Phase III–IV trials led in Canada/United States of a sample of 30 commonly used medications among those previously listed. We extracted information on study design, participants, and efficacy/safety analysis specific to older patients. We used simple linear regression and Chi‐square/Fisher's exact tests to analyze time trends in the representation of older adults over different periods.ResultsA total of 195 monographs were included. Of the 130 monographs reporting a dosing recommendation in older adults, 53 (41%) also reported limited/insufficient data in this population or its subgroups. Of the 373 trials included, 217 (58%) did not integrate a maximum age as an inclusion criterion. However, only 113 (30%) reported including a proportion of older adults representative (or over‐representative) of the Canadian older population. Most trials (n = 289; 78%) did not provide efficacy or safety data specific to older adults. In our sample, the number/proportion of older adults in trials seemed to be increasingly reported over time, either explicitly or implicitly (e.g., inclusion criterion specifies <65 years old).ConclusionsNewly marketed medications still appear to under‐represent older adults. The resulting lack of clear recommendations in monographs compromises evidence‐based practice, thereby perpetuating the risk to older adults' health.

Publisher

Wiley

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3