Effect of the FDA Safety and Innovation Act on racial and gender diversity in neurosurgical device trials

View More View Less
  • 1 Carle Illinois College of Medicine, University of Illinois, Champaign; and
  • | 2 Department of Neurosurgery, University of Illinois at Chicago, Illinois
Restricted access

Purchase Now

USD  $45.00

JNS + Pediatrics - 1 year subscription bundle (Individuals Only)

USD  $515.00

JNS + Pediatrics + Spine - 1 year subscription bundle (Individuals Only)

USD  $612.00
Print or Print + Online

OBJECTIVE

The US FDA uses evidence from clinical trials in its determination of safety and utility. However, these trials have often suffered from limited external validity and generalizability due to unrepresentative study populations with respect to clinical patient demographics. Section 907 of the FDA Safety and Innovation Act (FDASIA) of 2012 attempted to address this issue by mandating the reporting of certain study demographics in new device applications. However, no study has been performed on its effectiveness in the participant diversity of neurosurgical device trials.

METHODS

The FDA premarket approval (PMA) online database was queried for all original neurosurgical device submissions from January 1, 2006, to December 31, 2019. Endpoints of the study included racial and gender demographics of reported effectiveness trials, which were summated for each submission. Chi-square tests were performed on both endpoints for before and after years of FDASIA passage and implementation.

RESULTS

A total of 33 device approvals were analyzed, with 14 occurring before SIA implementation and 19 after. Most trials (96.97%) reported gender to the FDA, while 66.67% reported race and 63.64% reported ethnicity. Gender breakdown did not change significantly post-SIA (53.30% female, p = 0.884). Racial breakdown was significantly different from the 2010 US Census for all races (p < 0.001) both pre- and post-SIA. Only Native American race was significantly different in terms of representation post-SIA, increasing from 0% to 0.63% (p = 0.0187). There was no significant change in ethnicity.

CONCLUSIONS

The FDASIA, as currently written, does not appear to have had a significant impact on the racial or gender diversity of neurosurgical device clinical trial populations. This may be due to the noncompulsory nature of its guidance, or a lack of more stringent regulation on the composition of clinical trials themselves.

ABBREVIATIONS

FDASIA = FDA Safety and Innovation Act; OMB = Office of Management and Budget; PMA = premarket approval; RCT = randomized controlled trial.

Illustration from Schneider et al. (pp 205–214). Copyright Elyssa Siegel. Published with permission.

JNS + Pediatrics - 1 year subscription bundle (Individuals Only)

USD  $515.00

JNS + Pediatrics + Spine - 1 year subscription bundle (Individuals Only)

USD  $612.00
  • 1

    Zuckerman DM, Brown P, Nissen SE. Medical device recalls and the FDA approval process. Arch Intern Med. 2011;171(11):10061011.

  • 2

    Premarket Approval (PMA). FDA.gov. Accessed December 11, 2020.https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/premarket-submissions/premarket-approval-pma

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 3

    Golomb BA, Chan VT, Evans MA, et al. The older the better: are elderly study participants more non-representative? A cross-sectional analysis of clinical trial and observational study samples. BMJ Open. 2012;2(6):e000833.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 4

    Kennedy-Martin T, Curtis S, Faries D, et al. A literature review on the representativeness of randomized controlled trial samples and implications for the external validity of trial results. Trials. 2015;16:495.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 5

    Rothwell PM. External validity of randomised controlled trials: “to whom do the results of this trial apply?”. Lancet. 2005;365(9453):8293.

  • 6

    Smyth B, Haber A, Trongtrakul K, et al. Representativeness of randomized clinical trial cohorts in end-stage kidney disease: a meta-analysis. JAMA Intern Med. 2019;179:13161324.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 7

    McDowell MM, Zhao Y, Kellner CP, et al. Demographic and clinical predictors of multiple intracranial aneurysms in patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage. J Neurosurg. 2018;128(4):961968.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8

    Park JH, Razuk A, Saad PF, et al. Carotid stenosis: what is the high-risk population?. Clinics (São Paulo). 2012;67(8):865870.

  • 9

    Kramer DB, Kesselheim AS. User fees and beyond—the FDA Safety and Innovation Act of 2012. N Engl J Med. 2012;367(14):12771279.

  • 10

    FDASIA Section 907: Inclusion of Demographic Subgroups in Clinical Trials. FDA.gov. Accessed December 11, 2020. https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/food-and-drug-administration-safety-and-innovation-act-fdasia/fdasia-section-907-inclusion-demographic-subgroups-clinical-trials

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 11

    Coakley M, Fadiran EO, Parrish LJ, et al. Dialogues on diversifying clinical trials: successful strategies for engaging women and minorities in clinical trials. J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2012;21(7):713716.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 12

    Exner DV, Dries DL, Domanski MJ, Cohn JN. Lesser response to angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitor therapy in black as compared with white patients with left ventricular dysfunction. N Engl J Med. 2001;344(18):13511357.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 13

    Waksman R, Maya J, Angiolillo DJ, et al. Ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in black patients with stable coronary artery disease: prospective, randomized, open-label, multiple-dose, crossover pilot study. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2015;8(7):e002232.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 14

    Wright JT Jr, Dunn JK, Cutler JA, et al. Outcomes in hypertensive black and nonblack patients treated with chlorthalidone, amlodipine, and lisinopril. JAMA. 2005;293(13):15951608.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 15

    Joseph G, Dohan D. Diversity of participants in clinical trials in an academic medical center: the role of the ‘Good Study Patient?’. Cancer. 2009;115(3):608615.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 16

    Scharff DP, Mathews KJ, Jackson P, et al. More than Tuskegee: understanding mistrust about research participation. J Health Care Poor Underserved. 2010;21(3):879897.

  • 17

    Regnante JM, Richie N, Fashoyin-Aje L, et al. Operational strategies in US cancer centers of excellence that support the successful accrual of racial and ethnic minorities in clinical trials. Contemp Clin Trials Commun. 2020;17:100532.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 32 32 32
Full Text Views 18 18 18
PDF Downloads 30 30 30
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0