Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

New Benchmarks on Demographic Disparities in Pivotal Trials Supporting FDA-Approved Drugs and Biologics

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Therapeutic Innovation & Regulatory Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

A lack of diversity and representation in clinical trials is an established issue in drug development, and the COVID-19 pandemic increased awareness of the problem among the general public. This awareness has led to increased pressure on drug development sponsors, as well as additional attention and regulation from federal bodies, to improve the diversity of clinical trials. This study updates existing baselines regarding demographic disparities, as well as detecting early signs that the situation may be starting to improve.

Methods

Building on an existing dataset, this study collected and analyzed pivotal trial demographic data for drugs and biologics approved by the FDA between 2007 and 2021. Demographic data were collected from applications on the FDA website and clinicaltrials.gov, and compared to indication-specific demographic data when available, or US census estimates when they were not. Regression analyses were used to test for significant trends in reporting of demographic data and representation in pivotal trials, as well as the effect of representation on clinical trial duration and FDA review.

Results

Reporting of demographic data has improved significantly for all three demographic categories (sex, racial identity, and ethnic identity) over the observed time period (p < 0.0001). During this time period, overrepresentation of white participants has decreased significantly (p < 0.0001), and representation of Black participants has increased (p = 0.0003). Other racial and ethnic identities did not show significant trends. Representation of demographic subgroups was not significant predictors of trial duration except for the representation of Black participants, which was a negative correlation, indicating that as representation of Black participants increases, trial duration decreases (p = 0.0350).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

These data were derived from the following resources available in the public domain: Drugs@FDA, clinicaltrials.gov, CDC Wonder, the CDC website, the American Cancer Society, patient advocacy websites, and peer-reviewed publications.

References

  1. Getz KA, Smith ZP, Peña Y. Quantifying patient subpopulation disparities in new drugs and biologics approved between 2007 and 2017. Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2020;54(6):1541–50. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43441-020-00181-9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Loree JM, Anand S, Dasari A, et al. Disparity of race reporting and representation in clinical trials leading to cancer drug approvals from 2008 to 2018. JAMA Oncol. 2019;5(10):e191870. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaoncol.2019.1870.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Bierer BE, White SA, Meloney LG, Ahmed HR, Strauss DH, Clark LT. Achieving diversity, inclusion, and equity in clinical research. : multi-regional clinical trials center of Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard (MRCT Center); 2021. https://mrctcenter.org/diversity-in-clinical-research/guidance/guidance-document/. Accessed 15 June 2023.

  4. Rubin E. Striving for diversity in research studies. N Engl J Med. 2021;385(15):1429–1430. doi:https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMe2114651

  5. Oh SS, Galanter J, Thakur N, et al. Diversity in clinical and biomedical research: a promise yet to be fulfilled. PLOS Med. 2015;12(12):e1001918. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001918.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Hamel LM, Penner LA, Albrecht TL, Heath E, Gwede CK, Eggly S. Barriers to clinical trial enrollment in racial and ethnic minority patients with cancer. Cancer Control J Moffitt Cancer Cent. 2016;23(4):327–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Research C for DE and Drug Trials Snapshots. FDA. Published online May 17, 2023. https://www.fda.gov/drugs/drug-approvals-and-databases/drug-trials-snapshots. Accessed 17 May 2023.

  8. Hwang TJ, Brawley OW. New federal incentives for diversity in clinical trials. N Engl J Med. 2022;387(15):1347–9. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMp2209043.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Diversity plans to improve enrollment of participants from underrepresented racial and ethnic populations in clinical trials guidance for industry. Draft Guidance, Food and Drug Administration; 2022:12. https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents/diversity-plans-improve-enrollment-participants-underrepresented-racial-and-ethnic-populations

  10. Sen. Menendez R [D N. S.2706 - 117th congress (2021–2022): DIVERSE trials act. Published August 10, 2021. http://www.congress.gov/. Accessed 17 May 2023.

  11. Rep. Eshoo AG [D C 18. H.R.6584 - 117th congress (2021–2022): DEPICT act. Published February 4, 2022. http://www.congress.gov/. Accessed 17 May 2023.

  12. Diversity in Clinical Trials at FDA Gets a Boost From New Law. https://news.bloomberglaw.com/pharma-and-life-sciences/diversity-in-clinical-trials-at-fda-gets-a-boost-from-new-law. Accessed 17 May 2023.

  13. Rep. Connolly GE [D V 11. H.R.2617 - 117th congress (2021–2022): consolidated appropriations act, 2023. Published December 29, 2022. http://www.congress.gov/. Accessed 17 May 2023.

  14. Smith Z, Botto E, Getz K. Quantifying diversity and representation in pivotal trials leading to marketing authorization in Europe. Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2022;56(5):795–804. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43441-022-00421-0.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Top 25 Pharma & BioPharma in 2022|Contract Pharma. https://www.contractpharma.com/heaps/view/10305/1/. Accessed 15 June 2023.

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by a research grant from Clario.

Funding

This article is funded by Clario.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Tufts Center for the Study of Drug Development, Tufts University, Boston, MA, USA

    Zachary Smith, Emily Botto & Kenneth Getz

  2. Trial Equity, Philadelphia, PA, USA

    Otis Johnson

  3. Clario, Philadelphia, PA, USA

    Todd Rudo

Authors
  1. Zachary Smith
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Emily Botto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Otis Johnson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Todd Rudo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Kenneth Getz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Zachary Smith.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Zachary Smith, Emily Botto, Otis Johnson and Kenneth Getz have no conflicts to disclose. Todd Rudo discloses that he is a Clario employee and a shareholder.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Smith, Z., Botto, E., Johnson, O. et al. New Benchmarks on Demographic Disparities in Pivotal Trials Supporting FDA-Approved Drugs and Biologics. Ther Innov Regul Sci 58, 143–152 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43441-023-00579-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s43441-023-00579-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation