Thake Miriam, Lowry Andrew
Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Glossop Road, Sheffield, S102JF, UK.
Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2017 Sep;72:99-102. doi: 10.1016/j.archger.2017.05.017. Epub 2017 Jun 7.
The unjustified exclusion of older participants from clinical trials creates research populations that are non-representative, in turn creating difficulties applying research to the target populations. The aim of this study was to assess the proportion of randomised control trials (RCTs) that have unexplained upper age limits and review whether this proportion is reducing over time.
All RCTs in BMJ, Lancet, JAMA and NEJM from 1998 to 2015 were reviewed to identify any specified upper-age cut off and, if so, whether this exclusion criterion had an explanation in the text. The proportion of RCTs with an unexplained cut off was then correlated over time to look for any changes.
5680 papers were identified and 1339 excluded as they did not meet the search criteria. Of the remaining 4341 RCTs, 1258 (29%) had upper age limits specified, 1168 (92.8%) of which did not have any explanation for this cut off, a total of 26.9% of the RCTs reviewed. Over the 18-year period there was limited but statistically significant decrease in the proportion of RCTs with unexplained upper age limits (Pearson Correlation -0.609, P valve 0.007).
Despite being the highest consumers of medical interventions and medications, this review highlights that older patients remain under-represented in clinical trial with only modest improvements despite increasing awareness of the problem. Future research must continue to adapt to provide insight into the differential effects of medical treatments in older patients by ensuring that trial participants are representative of the patient population receiving the intended therapy.
在临床试验中不合理地排除老年参与者会导致研究人群缺乏代表性,进而难以将研究成果应用于目标人群。本研究旨在评估设定了不明原因的年龄上限的随机对照试验(RCT)的比例,并审视这一比例是否随时间推移而下降。
对1998年至2015年发表在《英国医学杂志》(BMJ)、《柳叶刀》(Lancet)、《美国医学会杂志》(JAMA)和《新英格兰医学杂志》(NEJM)上的所有RCT进行审查,以确定是否设定了明确的年龄上限,若设定了,文本中是否对该排除标准作出了解释。随后,将设定了不明原因年龄上限的RCT的比例随时间进行关联分析,以寻找变化情况。
共识别出5680篇论文,其中1339篇因不符合检索标准而被排除。在其余4341项RCT中,1258项(29%)设定了年龄上限,其中1168项(92.8%)未对该年龄上限作出任何解释,占所审查的RCT总数的26.9%。在这18年期间,设定了不明原因年龄上限的RCT的比例虽有有限但具有统计学意义的下降(Pearson相关系数为-0.609,P值为0.007)。
尽管老年患者是医疗干预和药物的最大消费群体,但本综述凸显出老年患者在临床试验中的代表性仍然不足,尽管对该问题的认识有所提高,但改善幅度不大。未来的研究必须继续做出调整,通过确保试验参与者能够代表接受预期治疗的患者群体来深入了解老年患者医疗治疗的差异效应。