1. Clinical trial designs of emerging therapies for diabetic kidney disease (DKD).
- Author
-
Singh, Ajay K., Farag, Youssef M.K., Zheng, Zihe, and Bakris, George L.
- Subjects
GLUCAGON-like peptide-1 receptor ,TYPE 2 diabetes ,MEDICAL personnel ,GLUCAGON-like peptide-1 agonists ,DISEASE risk factors - Abstract
Current evidence for medical therapies for diabetic kidney disease (DKD) is largely based on large-scale clinical trials. These trials, however, often exhibit heterogeneity in participant characteristics and baseline kidney function. These differences may lead to misinterpretation in clinical practice, such that treatment effects from different trials are directly compared and generalized to broader populations beyond the population in which each trial was conducted. This is particularly relevant if comparisons on efficacy and safety are made when the underlying study populations are distinctly different. Indeed, key clinical trials evaluating sodium-glucose transport protein-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i), non-steroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (nsMRA), and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) differed in recruitment requirements (inclusion/exclusion criteria), resulting in differences in the severity of the underlying kidney disease as well as risk factor profiles. Moreover, these trials defined their primary and secondary outcomes differently. Collectively, these factors lead to distinct study populations with different baseline risks for DKD progression in the placebo arm in each clinical trial. Consequently, a direct head-to-head comparison of the treatment effect between treatments using relative risk measures from placebo-controlled clinical trials alone is not recommended. In addition, healthcare professionals should be equipped to understand the specific target population of clinical trials to avoid over-generalization when drawing conclusions from these trials. Plain Language Summary: The medicines approved to help people with compromised kidney function were developed based on clinical trials that differed in many ways. There is a risk that clinical trials may be incorrectly compared and generalized by healthcare providers. In this review, the authors highlight the importance of interpreting clinical trial results cautiously while being mindful of the study population features. Key clinical trials for the treatment of diabetic kidney disease had different recruitment requirements for participants, a wide range of kidney disease severity, and different risks of disease progression in the comparison arm that did not receive the treatment during the trial. The conclusion of this review is to highlight the inappropriateness of comparing these medicines with each other using the results of clinical trials alone. It is important for the medical community to understand the specific types of patients that were involved in the clinical trials, to avoid unjustified conclusions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
- Published
- 2024
- Full Text
- View/download PDF