The landscape of clinical trials in nephrology: A systematic review of


Journal Article

Background Well-designed trials are of paramount importance in improving the delivery of care to patients with kidney disease. However, it remains unknown whether contemporary clinical trials within nephrology are of sufficient quality and quantity to meet this need. Study Design Systematic review. Setting & Population Studies registered with Selection Criteria for Studies Interventional (ie, nonobservational) studies (both randomized and nonrandomized) registered between October 2007 and September 2010 were included for analysis. Studies were reviewed independently by physicians and classified by clinical specialty. Predictor Nephrology versus cardiology versus other trials. Outcomes Select clinical trial characteristics. Results Of 40,970 trials overall, 1,054 (2.6%) were classified as nephrology. Most nephrology trials were for treatment (75.4%) or prevention (15.7%), with very few diagnostic, screening, or health services research studies. Most nephrology trials were randomized (72.3%). Study designs included 24.9% with a single study group, 64.0% that included parallel groups, and 9.4% that were crossover trials. Nephrology trials, compared with 2,264 cardiology trials (5.5% overall), were more likely to be smaller (64.5% vs 48.0% enrolling 100 patients), phases 1-2 (29.0% vs 19.7%), and unblinded (66.2% vs 53.3%; P < 0.05 for all). Nephrology trials also were more likely than cardiology trials to include a drug intervention (72.4% vs 41.9%) and less likely to report having a data monitoring committee (40.3% vs 48.5%; P <.

Full Text

Duke Authors

Cited Authors

  • Inrig, JK; Califf, RM; Tasneem, A; Vegunta, RK; Molina, C; Stanifer, JW; Chiswell, K; Patel, UD

Published Date

  • January 1, 2014

Published In

Volume / Issue

  • 63 / 5

Start / End Page

  • 771 - 780

Electronic International Standard Serial Number (EISSN)

  • 1523-6838

International Standard Serial Number (ISSN)

  • 0272-6386

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

  • 10.1053/j.ajkd.2013.10.043

Citation Source

  • Scopus