The Culture Wars Strike Clinical Trials

In recent years, the importance of diversity in clinical trials has gained significant attention in the medical research community. This focus is not just a matter of inclusivity; it’s a crucial scientific and ethical imperative that directly impacts the quality and applicability of medical research.

Why Diversity in Clinical Trials is Essential

Scientific Validity and Generalizability

Different populations may respond differently to the same treatment due to variations in genetics, lifestyle, and environmental factors. By including diverse participants, researchers can better understand how a treatment works across various groups, leading to more accurate and widely applicable results.

Addressing Health Disparities

Minority groups often experience poorer health outcomes in various diseases. Including these groups in clinical trials is a crucial step towards understanding and addressing these disparities, potentially leading to more targeted and effective treatments for underserved populations.

Innovation and Discovery

Diversity in clinical trials can lead to unexpected discoveries. For instance, the identification of PCSK9, which revolutionized our understanding of cholesterol homeostasis, was a result of studying variations in cardiovascular risk factors among different racial groups.

Alignment with ICH Guidelines

The International Council for Harmonisation (ICH) has recognized the importance of diversity in its updated guidelines, particularly in ICH E6(R3) and ICH E8(R1).

ICH E6(R3)

This guideline emphasizes the importance of including diverse patient populations in clinical trials. It encourages the use of innovative trial designs and technologies to enable wider participation and inclusion of diverse populations. The guideline also stresses the need for quality by design (QbD) and a focus on critical-to-quality factors, which inherently includes considerations of diversity to ensure the reliability of trial results.

ICH E8(R1)

ICH E8(R1) focuses on the general considerations for clinical studies and emphasizes the importance of engaging with a broader range of stakeholders, including patients and patient advocacy groups. This approach naturally leads to more diverse perspectives in trial design and conduct, potentially increasing participation from underrepresented groups.

The Impact of Recent Policy Changes

The recent purge of FDA pages on clinical trial diversity, as reported by STAT News, raises significant concerns about the future of inclusive clinical. This action, part of a wider executive order banning diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives, could have far-reaching consequences:

  1. Reduced Guidance: The removal of these resources may leave researchers and pharmaceutical companies with less clear direction on how to ensure diverse representation in their trials.
  2. Potential Setbacks: Years of progress in improving trial diversity could be undermined, potentially leading to less representative studies and, consequently, less generalizable results.
  3. Health Equity Concerns: This move could exacerbate existing health disparities by reducing the focus on including underrepresented groups in clinical research.
  4. Scientific Integrity: The quality and applicability of clinical trial data may be compromised if diversity is not actively pursued, potentially affecting the safety and efficacy of new treatments for certain populations.

Moving Forward

Despite this setback, the scientific and pharma community must continue to prioritize diversity in clinical trials. The principles outlined in ICH E6(R3) and E8(R1) provide a strong foundation for this effort. Researchers, pharmaceutical companies, and regulatory bodies should:

  1. Continue to develop innovative recruitment strategies to reach diverse populations.
  2. Engage with community leaders and organizations to build trust and awareness about clinical trials.
  3. Design trials with flexibility to improve access for all populations, including the use of decentralized trial elements.
  4. Maintain a focus on quality by design, ensuring that diversity considerations are built into trial planning from the outset.

It is important to remember that E6(r3) is the regulation in Europe, while it is a guidance in the US. So companies need to follow it for their EMA approval possibilities.

In conclusion, diversity in clinical trials is not just a matter of equity; it’s a scientific necessity that ensures the development of safe and effective treatments for all populations. While recent policy changes may present challenges, the medical research community must remain committed to this crucial aspect of clinical research, guided by international standards and ethical imperatives.

Quality Culture requires men being better allies to women

ISO 26000: Guidance on social responsibility defines social responsibility as:

The responsibility of an organization for the impacts of its decisions and activities on society and the environment, through transparent and ethical behavior that:

  • Contributes to sustainable development, including health and the welfare of society
  • Takes into account the expectations of stakeholders
  • Is in compliance with applicable laws and consistent with international norms of behavior
  • Is integrated throughout the organization and practiced in its relationships

ISO 26000 also defines seven key principles of socially responsible behavior:

  • Accountability
  • Transparency
  • Ethical behavior
  • Respect for stakeholder interests
  • Respect for the rule of law
  • Respect for international norms of behavior
  • Respect for human rights

One shouldn’t have to look for reasons for human rights and the drive towards to diversity, but let us simply say there are a ton of studies that show that diversity improves decision making, problem solving and even make us smarter.

In short diversity is critical towards a Quality Culture. Gender equality is a critical part of being a successful quality leader, and it behooves each and every one of us men to drive towards it. To figure out how to make our own workplaces more diverse.

There are many aspects of creating diverse culture but I want to discuss how it is critical that men support women, that we be allies. Too many organizations still miss the mark on gender equity efforts by focusing gender initiatives solely on changing women — from the way they network to the way the lead. Individualistic approaches to solving gender inequities overlook systemic structural causes and reinforce the perception that these are women’s issues — effectively telling men they don’t need to be involved. As always, it is always about the system thinking. Without the avid support of men progress toward ending gender disparities is unlikely and organizations cannot find reap the benefits.

Men need to become better allies by focusing on listening, support, and respect. We need to listen to women’s voices and bring all those core skills of  focus, sincerity, empathy, refusal to interrupt, and genuine valuing to systematically addressing inequities, whether the ubiquitous workplace sexual harassment or gender exclusion. End your silence and support and ally. No matter what level of your organization you are in.

By being a deliberate male ally, by actively promoting gender fairness and equity in the workplace we can drive systematic improvements. To lean on Deming, we can drive out fear. And isn’t that what Quality is all about?