Principal investigators' experience of COVID-19 therapeutic clinical trials in Japan: a qualitative study.

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Satoko Horii, Hiroki Saito, Taro Shibata, Miwa Sonoda, Tatsuo Iiyama, Kazuaki Jindai
{"title":"Principal investigators' experience of COVID-19 therapeutic clinical trials in Japan: a qualitative study.","authors":"Satoko Horii, Hiroki Saito, Taro Shibata, Miwa Sonoda, Tatsuo Iiyama, Kazuaki Jindai","doi":"10.1136/bmjopen-2024-097611","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>During the COVID-19 pandemic, many clinical trials were conducted to identify effective COVID-19 therapeutics. However, while a large amount of resources was invested and significant numbers of patients participated, this did not necessarily have an impact on clinical practice. To face these issues, initiatives such as the 100 Days Mission have been set out globally. Yet, limited data exist on the context surrounding the implementation of clinical trials at a national level during a health emergency. The study explored experiences and perceptions of principal investigators in conducting clinical trials for COVID-19 therapeutics in Japan.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A qualitative study was conducted using semistructured interviews. The obtained data were inductively analysed using thematic analysis.</p><p><strong>Setting and participants: </strong>We interviewed 15 principal investigators between September and November 2022 who conducted investigator-initiated clinical trials on the development of COVID-19 therapeutics in Japan.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Three themes were generated: <b>structural barriers</b>, <b>fragmented efforts</b> and <b>limited evidence generation</b>. <b>Structural barriers</b> and <b>fragmented efforts</b> comprised four subthemes: individual, institutional, interinstitutional and policy/regulatory levels. <b>Structural barriers</b> at all levels included (1) limitations of individual capabilities, (2) the double burden of clinical practice and research, (3) inefficient interinstitutional collaboration and (4) regulatory frameworks and available resources that interrupt stakeholders' actions, leading to <b>limited evidence generation</b> despite the <b>fragmented efforts</b> of principal investigators and other stakeholders.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study illustrated that the efforts of Japanese principal investigators did not necessarily pay off in identifying therapeutics. A strategic and systematic approach for an improved national clinical trial ecosystem must be sought during the interpandemic period to overcome structural barriers in harmonisation with the global stakeholders.</p>","PeriodicalId":9158,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Open","volume":"15 6","pages":"e097611"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12198784/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Open","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2024-097611","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: During the COVID-19 pandemic, many clinical trials were conducted to identify effective COVID-19 therapeutics. However, while a large amount of resources was invested and significant numbers of patients participated, this did not necessarily have an impact on clinical practice. To face these issues, initiatives such as the 100 Days Mission have been set out globally. Yet, limited data exist on the context surrounding the implementation of clinical trials at a national level during a health emergency. The study explored experiences and perceptions of principal investigators in conducting clinical trials for COVID-19 therapeutics in Japan.

Design: A qualitative study was conducted using semistructured interviews. The obtained data were inductively analysed using thematic analysis.

Setting and participants: We interviewed 15 principal investigators between September and November 2022 who conducted investigator-initiated clinical trials on the development of COVID-19 therapeutics in Japan.

Results: Three themes were generated: structural barriers, fragmented efforts and limited evidence generation. Structural barriers and fragmented efforts comprised four subthemes: individual, institutional, interinstitutional and policy/regulatory levels. Structural barriers at all levels included (1) limitations of individual capabilities, (2) the double burden of clinical practice and research, (3) inefficient interinstitutional collaboration and (4) regulatory frameworks and available resources that interrupt stakeholders' actions, leading to limited evidence generation despite the fragmented efforts of principal investigators and other stakeholders.

Conclusions: This study illustrated that the efforts of Japanese principal investigators did not necessarily pay off in identifying therapeutics. A strategic and systematic approach for an improved national clinical trial ecosystem must be sought during the interpandemic period to overcome structural barriers in harmonisation with the global stakeholders.

主要研究者在日本开展新冠肺炎治疗性临床试验的经验:一项定性研究
目的:在COVID-19大流行期间,进行了许多临床试验以确定有效的COVID-19治疗方法。然而,虽然投入了大量的资源和大量的患者参与,但这并不一定对临床实践产生影响。为了应对这些问题,全球各地都提出了“100天使命”等倡议。然而,关于在突发卫生事件期间在国家一级实施临床试验的背景,现有的数据有限。该研究探讨了主要研究人员在日本开展COVID-19治疗药物临床试验的经验和看法。设计:采用半结构化访谈进行定性研究。所得数据采用主题分析法进行归纳分析。环境和参与者:我们在2022年9月至11月期间采访了15名主要研究人员,他们在日本开展了研究人员发起的COVID-19治疗药物开发临床试验。结果:产生了三个主题:结构性障碍、分散的努力和有限的证据产生。结构性障碍和分散的努力包括四个次级主题:个人、机构、机构间和政策/管制一级。各级结构性障碍包括:(1)个人能力的限制;(2)临床实践和研究的双重负担;(3)机构间合作效率低下;(4)干扰利益相关者行动的监管框架和可用资源,导致尽管主要研究者和其他利益相关者的努力分散,但证据产生有限。结论:这项研究表明,日本主要研究人员的努力不一定能在确定治疗方法方面取得成功。在大流行期间,必须寻求改善国家临床试验生态系统的战略和系统方法,以与全球利益攸关方协调一致,克服结构性障碍。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BMJ Open
BMJ Open MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
3.40%
发文量
4510
审稿时长
2-3 weeks
期刊介绍: BMJ Open is an online, open access journal, dedicated to publishing medical research from all disciplines and therapeutic areas. The journal publishes all research study types, from study protocols to phase I trials to meta-analyses, including small or specialist studies. Publishing procedures are built around fully open peer review and continuous publication, publishing research online as soon as the article is ready.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信