Attention for sex in COVID-19 trials: a review of regulatory dossiers
An under-representation of women and a lack of sex-specific analyses in COVID-19 trials has been suggested. However, the higher number of men than women who are severely affected by COVID-19 and the restricted information in scientific publications may have biased these suggestions. Therefore, we ev...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2022-03-01
|
| Series: | BMJ Global Health |
| Online Access: | https://gh.bmj.com/content/7/3/e008173.full |
| _version_ | 1797670084541415424 |
|---|---|
| author | Sieta T de Vries Peter G M Mol Harald Enzmann Viktoriia Starokozhko Ingrid M M Schellens Leonoor Wijnans Marco Cavaleri |
| author_facet | Sieta T de Vries Peter G M Mol Harald Enzmann Viktoriia Starokozhko Ingrid M M Schellens Leonoor Wijnans Marco Cavaleri |
| author_sort | Sieta T de Vries |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | An under-representation of women and a lack of sex-specific analyses in COVID-19 trials has been suggested. However, the higher number of men than women who are severely affected by COVID-19 and the restricted information in scientific publications may have biased these suggestions. Therefore, we evaluated sex proportionality and sex-specific efficacy and safety data in trials of COVID-19 treatments and vaccines using both publicly available regulatory documents and confidential documents used by regulators in their review of medicinal products. Included were two treatments (ie, remdesivir and dexamethasone) and four vaccines (ie, BNT162b2 mRNA (BioNTech/Pfizer), mRNA-1273 (Moderna), ChAdOx1-S (AstraZeneca) and Ad26.COV2-S (Janssen)) that received marketing authorisation by the European Commission at the time of the study conduct. An under-representation of women was shown in three of the nine data sets for one treatment (ie, remdesivir), but the proportion of women included was representative in each of the data sets for the other five products. This indicates that there is no structural under-representation of women in the COVID-19 trials. Currently, sex-specific efficacy data are available for five of the six assessed products and sex-specific safety data are available for half of the products only. It is important that this information will also be made available for the other products. There are only small differences in efficacy and safety between men and women which are likely to be of limited clinical relevance. Sex-specific efficacy information can generally be found in the publicly available regulatory documents other than the Summary of Product Characteristics, for which more awareness might be required. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-11T20:54:35Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-2a448a4269c14d4a8dd8d241447638df |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2059-7908 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-11T20:54:35Z |
| publishDate | 2022-03-01 |
| publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
| record_format | Article |
| series | BMJ Global Health |
| spelling | doaj.art-2a448a4269c14d4a8dd8d241447638df2023-09-30T14:10:08ZengBMJ Publishing GroupBMJ Global Health2059-79082022-03-017310.1136/bmjgh-2021-008173Attention for sex in COVID-19 trials: a review of regulatory dossiersSieta T de Vries0Peter G M Mol1Harald Enzmann2Viktoriia Starokozhko3Ingrid M M Schellens4Leonoor Wijnans5Marco Cavaleri6Department of Clinical Pharmacy and Pharmacology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The NetherlandsDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy and Pharmacology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The NetherlandsCommittee for Medicinal Products for Human Use, European Medicines Agency (EMA), Amsterdam, The NetherlandsDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy and Pharmacology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The NetherlandsDutch Medicines Evaluation Board, Utrecht, The NetherlandsDutch Medicines Evaluation Board, Utrecht, The NetherlandsEuropean Medicines Agency (EMA), Amsterdam, The NetherlandsAn under-representation of women and a lack of sex-specific analyses in COVID-19 trials has been suggested. However, the higher number of men than women who are severely affected by COVID-19 and the restricted information in scientific publications may have biased these suggestions. Therefore, we evaluated sex proportionality and sex-specific efficacy and safety data in trials of COVID-19 treatments and vaccines using both publicly available regulatory documents and confidential documents used by regulators in their review of medicinal products. Included were two treatments (ie, remdesivir and dexamethasone) and four vaccines (ie, BNT162b2 mRNA (BioNTech/Pfizer), mRNA-1273 (Moderna), ChAdOx1-S (AstraZeneca) and Ad26.COV2-S (Janssen)) that received marketing authorisation by the European Commission at the time of the study conduct. An under-representation of women was shown in three of the nine data sets for one treatment (ie, remdesivir), but the proportion of women included was representative in each of the data sets for the other five products. This indicates that there is no structural under-representation of women in the COVID-19 trials. Currently, sex-specific efficacy data are available for five of the six assessed products and sex-specific safety data are available for half of the products only. It is important that this information will also be made available for the other products. There are only small differences in efficacy and safety between men and women which are likely to be of limited clinical relevance. Sex-specific efficacy information can generally be found in the publicly available regulatory documents other than the Summary of Product Characteristics, for which more awareness might be required.https://gh.bmj.com/content/7/3/e008173.full |
| spellingShingle | Sieta T de Vries Peter G M Mol Harald Enzmann Viktoriia Starokozhko Ingrid M M Schellens Leonoor Wijnans Marco Cavaleri Attention for sex in COVID-19 trials: a review of regulatory dossiers BMJ Global Health |
| title | Attention for sex in COVID-19 trials: a review of regulatory dossiers |
| title_full | Attention for sex in COVID-19 trials: a review of regulatory dossiers |
| title_fullStr | Attention for sex in COVID-19 trials: a review of regulatory dossiers |
| title_full_unstemmed | Attention for sex in COVID-19 trials: a review of regulatory dossiers |
| title_short | Attention for sex in COVID-19 trials: a review of regulatory dossiers |
| title_sort | attention for sex in covid 19 trials a review of regulatory dossiers |
| url | https://gh.bmj.com/content/7/3/e008173.full |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT sietatdevries attentionforsexincovid19trialsareviewofregulatorydossiers AT petergmmol attentionforsexincovid19trialsareviewofregulatorydossiers AT haraldenzmann attentionforsexincovid19trialsareviewofregulatorydossiers AT viktoriiastarokozhko attentionforsexincovid19trialsareviewofregulatorydossiers AT ingridmmschellens attentionforsexincovid19trialsareviewofregulatorydossiers AT leonoorwijnans attentionforsexincovid19trialsareviewofregulatorydossiers AT marcocavaleri attentionforsexincovid19trialsareviewofregulatorydossiers |