The Patient in Your Alzheimer’s Disease Study May be in Another: Duplication and Deception in Clinical Trials of Alzheimer’s Disease

  • Thomas ShiovitzEmail author
  • B. Steinmiller
  • C. Steinmetz
  • S. Perez
  • R. Oseas
Brief Reports


Duplicate and deceptive subjects, a significant issue in CNS studies, are not often considered in Alzheimer’s Disease (AD) clinical trials. However, AD patients and their study partners may be motivated to take advantage of different mechanisms of action, increase odds of receiving active treatment, and/or obtain financial compensation, which may lead them to participate in multiple studies. CTSdatabase reviewed memory loss subjects (n=1087) from January 2017 through May 2019 to determine how many attempted to screen at multiple sites. 117 subjects (10.8%) visited more than one site within two years. When these potential AD subjects went to additional sites, it was predominantly for non-memory indications (often MDD or schizophrenia). For those that participated in studies, the rate of duplication approached 4% of screened AD subjects. This data indicates that significant numbers of AD subjects attempt to enroll at multiple sites, which confounds efficacy and safety signals in clinical trials.

Key words

Professional research subject deception duplicate subjects dual enrollment 


Funding: There is no outside funding for this report. Ms. Steinmiller, Ms. Steinmetz and Ms. Perez are employees of CTSdatabase, LLC.

Conflict of interest disclosure: Dr. Shiovitz has ownership interest in and is President of CTSdatabase, LLC.

Ethical standards: All data reported in this study has been collected from patients who have signed an appropriate IRB or Ethics Committee approved consent form.


  1. 1.
    McCann DJ, Petry NM, Bresell A, Isacsson E, Wilson E, Alexander RC. Medication nonadherence, “professional subjects,” and apparent placebo responders: Overlapping challenges for medications development. J Clin Psychopharmacol. 2015 Oct;35(5):566–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Shiovitz TM, Bain EE, McCann DJ, Skolnick P, Laughren T, Hanina A, et al. Mitigating the Effects of Nonadherence in Clinical Trials. J Clin Pharmacol. 2016;56(9):1151–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Czobor P, Skolnick P. The Secrets of a Successful Clinical Trial: Compliance, Compliance, and Compliance. Mol Interv. 2011 Apr;11(2):107–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Devine EG, Peebles KR, Martini V. Strategies to exclude subjects who conceal and fabricate information when enrolling in clinical trials. Contemp Clin Trials Commun. 2017;5:67–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    McCaul ME, Wand GS. Detecting Deception in Our Research Participants: Are Your Participants Who You Think They Are? Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2018 Feb;42(2):230–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Shiovitz TM, Fox BL, Steinmetz CB, et al. Now I Remember! (That I’m in Another Study): Duplicate Subjects in Clinical Trials of Alzheimer’s Disease, Clinical Trials on Alzheimer’s Disease Annual Meeting. November 2, 2017, Boston, MA. Poster.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Home — Accessed 2019-09-23.
  8. 8.
    Lee CP, Holmes T, Neri E, Kushida CA. Deception in clinical trials and its impact on recruitment and adherence of study participants. Contemp Clin Trials. 2018 Sep 1;72:146–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chertkow H. An Action Plan to Face the Challenge of Dementia: International Statement on Dementia from IAP for Health. J Prev Alzheimer’s Dis. 2018;5(3):207–212.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lee Y. Primary Prevention of Dementia: The Future of Population-Based Multidomain Lifestyle Interventions. J Prev Alz Dis 2018;5(1):5–7Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Aisen PS. Failure After Failure. What Next in AD Drug Development? J Prev Alz Dis 2019;6(3):150.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Anstey KJ, Peters R. Oversimplification of Dementia Risk Reducation Messaging is a Threat to Knowledge Translation in Dementia Prevention Research. J Prev Alz Dis 2018;5(1):2–4.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gauthier S, Alam J, Fillit H, Iwatsubo T, Liu-Seifert H, Sabbagh M, et al. Combination Therapy for Alzheimer’s Disease: Perspectives of the EU/US CTAD Task Force. J Prev Alzheimers Dis. 2019;6(3):164–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Fernandez Lynch H, Joffe S, Thirumurthy H, Xie D, Largent EA. Association Between Financial Incentives and Participant Deception About Study Eligibility. JAMA Netw Open. 2019;2(1):e187355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lee CP, Holmes T, Neri E, Kushida CA. Deception in clinical trials and its impact on recruitment and adherence of study participants. Contemp Clin Trials. 2018 Sep 1;72:146–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Resnik DB, Koski G. A National Registry for Healthy Volunteers in Phase 1 Clinical Trials JAMA J Am Med Assoc. 2011 Mar 23;305(12):1236–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hanson E. Hudgins B, Tyler D, et al. A method to identify suvjects who attempt to enroll in more than 1 trial within a drug development program and preliminary review of subject characteristics. Poster presented at CNS Summit; November 2011; Boca Raton, FL.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Food and Drug Administration. Enhancing the Diversity of Clinical Trial Populations — Eligibility Criteria, Enrollment Practices, and Trial Designs Guidance for Industry. Draft Guidance issued June,2019.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Serdi and Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Thomas Shiovitz
    • 1
    • 2
    • 4
    Email author
  • B. Steinmiller
    • 2
  • C. Steinmetz
    • 2
  • S. Perez
    • 2
  • R. Oseas
    • 3
  1. 1.California Neuroscience Research Medical GroupSherman OaksUSA
  2. 2.CTSdatabase, LLCSherman OaksUSA
  3. 3.University of Southern CaliforniaLos AngelesUSA
  4. 4.Sherman OaksUSA

Personalised recommendations