Diverse Research Teams and Underrepresented Groups in Clinical Studies

Importance

Several ophthalmic diseases disproportionately affect racial and ethnic minority patients, yet most clinical trials struggle to enroll cohorts that are demographically representative of disease burden; some barriers to recruitment include time and transportation, language and cultural differences, and fear and mistrust of research due to historical abuses. Incorporating diversity within the research team has been proposed as a method to increase trust and improve engagement among potential study participants.

Objective

To examine how demographic factors of potential research participants and personnel may be associated with patient consent rates to participate in prospective ophthalmic clinical studies.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective cohort study included patients from an urban, academic hospital who were approached for consent to participate in prospective ophthalmic clinical studies conducted between January 2015 and December 2021.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Multivariable logistic regression assessing associations between patient and research personnel demographics and rates of affirmative consent to participate was used.

Results

In total, 1380 patients (mean [SD] age, 58.6 [14.9] years; 50.3% male) who were approached for consent to participate in 10 prospective ophthalmic clinical studies were included. Of prospective patients, 566 (43.5%) were Black; 327 (25.1%), Hispanic or Latino; 373 (28.6%), White; 36 (2.8%), other race and ethnicity; and 78 (5.8%) declined to answer. Black patients (odds ratio [OR], 0.32; 95% CI, 0.24-0.44; P < .001) and Hispanic or Latino patients (OR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.20-0.47; P < .001) were less likely to consent compared with White patients. Patients with lower socioeconomic status were less likely to consent than patients with higher socioeconomic status (OR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.33-0.53; P < .001). Concordance between patient and research staff race and ethnicity was associated with increased odds of affirmative consent (OR, 2.72; 95% CI, 1.99-3.73; P < .001).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cohort study, patients from underrepresented racial and ethnic groups and those with lower socioeconomic status were less likely to participate in ophthalmic clinical studies. Concordance of race and ethnicity between patients and research staff was associated with improved participant enrollment. These findings underscore the importance of increasing diversity in clinical research teams to improve racial and ethnic representation in clinical studies.

A Pilot Randomized Clinical Trial of Base-in Relieving Prism Spectacle Treatment of Intermittent Exotropia

SIGNIFICANCE

This pilot randomized trial, the first to evaluate a specific base-in relieving prism treatment strategy for childhood intermittent exotropia, did not support proceeding to a full-scale clinical trial. Defining and measuring prism adaptation in children with intermittent exotropia are challenging and need further study.

PURPOSE

This study aimed to determine whether to proceed to a full-scale trial of relieving base-in prism spectacles versus refractive correction alone for children with intermittent exotropia.

METHODS

Children 3 years old to those younger than 13 years with distance intermittent exotropia control score of ≥2 points on the Intermittent Exotropia Office Control Scale (Strabismus 2006;14:147-150; 0 [phoria] to 5 [constant]), ≥1 episode of spontaneous exotropia, and 16 to 35∆ by prism-and-alternate-cover test, who did not fully prism adapt on a 30-minute in-office prism-adaptation test were randomized to base-in relieving prism (40% of the larger of distance and near exodeviations) or nonprism spectacles for 8 weeks. A priori criteria to conduct a full-scale trial were defined for the adjusted treatment group difference in mean distance control: "proceed" (≥0.75 points favoring prism), "uncertain" (>0 to <0.75 points favoring prism), or "do not proceed" (≥0 points favoring nonprism).

RESULTS

Fifty-seven children (mean age, 6.6 ± 2.2 years; mean baseline distance control, 3.5 points) received prism (n = 28) or nonprism (n = 29) spectacles. At 8 weeks, mean control values were 3.6 and 3.3 points in prism (n = 25) and nonprism (n = 25) groups, respectively, with an adjusted difference of 0.3 points (95% confidence interval, -0.5 to 1.1 points) favoring nonprism (meeting our a priori "do not proceed" criterion).

CONCLUSIONS

Base-in prism spectacles, equal to 40% of the larger of the exodeviations at distance or near, worn for 8 weeks by 3- to 12-year-old children with intermittent exotropia did not yield better distance control than refractive correction alone, with the confidence interval indicating that a favorable effect of 0.75 points or larger is unlikely. There was insufficient evidence to warrant a full-scale randomized trial.

Overminus Lens Therapy for Children 3 to 10 Years of Age With Intermittent Exotropia: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

This is the first large-scale randomized clinical trial evaluating the effectiveness and safety of overminus spectacle therapy for treatment of intermittent exotropia (IXT).

Objective

To evaluate the effectiveness of overminus spectacles to improve distance IXT control.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This randomized clinical trial conducted at 56 clinical sites between January 2017 and January 2019 associated with the Pediatric Eye Disease Investigator Group enrolled 386 children aged 3 to 10 years with IXT, a mean distance control score of 2 or worse, and a refractive error between 1.00 and -6.00 diopters (D). Data analysis was performed from February to December 2020.

Interventions

Participants were randomly assigned to overminus spectacle therapy (-2.50 D for 12 months, then -1.25 D for 3 months, followed by nonoverminus spectacles for 3 months) or to nonoverminus spectacle use.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Primary and secondary outcomes were the mean distance IXT control scores of participants examined after 12 months of treatment (primary outcome) and at 18 months (3 months after treatment ended) assessed by an examiner masked to treatment group. Change in refractive error from baseline to 12 months was compared between groups. Analyses were performed using the intention-to-treat population.

Results

The mean (SD) age of 196 participants randomized to overminus therapy and 190 participants randomized to nonoverminus treatment was 6.3 (2.1) years, and 226 (59%) were female. Mean distance control at 12 months was better in participants treated with overminus spectacles than with nonoverminus spectacles (1.8 vs 2.8 points; adjusted difference, -0.8; 95% CI, -1.0 to -0.5; P < .001). At 18 months, there was little or no difference in mean distance control between overminus and nonoverminus groups (2.4 vs 2.7 points; adjusted difference, -0.2; 95% CI, -0.5 to 0.04; P = .09). Myopic shift from baseline to 12 months was greater in the overminus than the nonoverminus group (-0.42 D vs -0.04 D; adjusted difference, -0.37 D; 95% CI, -0.49 to -0.26 D; P < .001), with 33 of 189 children (17%) in the overminus group vs 2 of 169 (1%) in the nonoverminus group having a shift higher than 1.00 D.

Conclusions and Relevance

Children 3 to 10 years of age had improved distance exotropia control when assessed wearing overminus spectacles after 12 months of overminus treatment; however, this treatment was associated with increased myopic shift. The beneficial effect of overminus lens therapy on distance exotropia control was not maintained after treatment was tapered off for 3 months and children were examined 3 months later.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02807350.