z-logo
Premium
Eligibility of Alzheimer's Disease Clinic Patients for Clinical Trials
Author(s) -
Schneider Lon S.,
Olin Jason T.,
Lyness Scott A.,
Chui Helena C.
Publication year - 1997
Publication title -
journal of the american geriatrics society
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.992
H-Index - 232
eISSN - 1532-5415
pISSN - 0002-8614
DOI - 10.1111/j.1532-5415.1997.tb02960.x
Subject(s) - medicine , generalizability theory , clinical trial , disease , population , randomized controlled trial , pediatrics , inclusion and exclusion criteria , alternative medicine , pathology , statistics , mathematics , environmental health
OBJECTIVES : To identify the percentage of patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) in a general clinic population who would be provisionally eligible for randomized clinical trials and the extent to which these patients represent the overall clinic‐based population. BACKGROUND : Many randomized clinical trials have restricted enrollment criteria that may limit generalizability, i.e., AD patients who fulfill selection criteria for phase III clinical trials may not be representative of other AD patients in clinical settings. DESIGN AND SETTING : Patients diagnosed as probable or possible AD from the nine clinical sites of the State of California's Alzheimer's Disease Diagnostic and Treatment Centers (ADDTC) were selected on the basis of their provisionally fulfilling the inclusion and exclusion criteria of two typical AD clinical trials at the time of their first visit (ECG and brain imaging criteria were not available). RESULTS : From a sample of 3470 subjects with possible or probable AD, overall, only 4.4% or 7.9% would have been provisionally eligible for each of two trials. Patients provisionally eligible were younger, relatively underrepresented by women, better educated, wealthier, and more likely to be white than ineligible patients. The major independent demographic predictors for eligibility were (1) income greater than $15,000 per year, (2) male gender, and (3) college education. More than 60% of probable AD patients were excluded because of significant behavioral problems; approximately one‐quarter each were excluded because of significant medical or neurological problems. Allowing patients with probable or possible AD to enroll would have resulted in 10.6% being eligible. CONCLUSION : Selection criteria for AD clinical trials result in a demographically and clinically constrained subgroup that is not representative of the overall clinic population. J Am Geriatr Soc 45:923–928, 1997.

This content is not available in your region!

Continue researching here.

Having issues? You can contact us here
Accelerating Research

Address

John Eccles House
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom