PLoS ONE (Jan 2018)

Characteristics of clinical trials in rare vs. common diseases: A register-based Latvian study.

  • Konstantins Logviss,
  • Dainis Krievins,
  • Santa Purvina

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0194494
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 13, no. 4
p. e0194494

Abstract

Read online

Conducting clinical studies in small populations may be very challenging; therefore quality of clinical evidence may differ between rare and non-rare disease therapies.This register-based study aims to evaluate the characteristics of clinical trials in rare diseases conducted in Latvia and compare them with clinical trials in more common conditions.The EU Clinical Trials Register (clinicaltrialsregister.eu) was used to identify interventional clinical trials related to rare diseases (n = 51) and to compose a control group of clinical trials in non-rare diseases (n = 102) for further comparison of the trial characteristics.We found no significant difference in the use of overall survival as a primary endpoint in clinical trials between rare and non-rare diseases (9.8% vs. 13.7%, respectively). However, clinical trials in rare diseases were less likely to be randomized controlled trials (62.7% vs. 83.3%). Rare and non-rare disease clinical trials varied in masking, with rare disease trials less likely to be double blind (45.1% vs. 63.7%). Active comparators were less frequently used in rare disease trials (36.4% vs. 58.8% of controlled trials). Clinical trials in rare diseases enrolled fewer participants than those in non-rare diseases: in Latvia (mean 18.3 vs. 40.2 subjects, respectively), in the European Economic Area (mean 181.0 vs. 626.9 subjects), and in the whole clinical trial (mean 335.8 vs. 1406.3 subjects). Although, we found no significant difference in trial duration between the groups (mean 38.3 vs. 36.4 months).The current study confirms that clinical trials in rare diseases vary from those in non-rare conditions, with notable differences in enrollment, randomization, masking, and the use of active comparators. However, we found no significant difference in trial duration and the use of overall survival as a primary endpoint.