Current status of acute pancreatitis related clinical trial registrations in China / 中华胰腺病杂志

ABSTRACT

Objective:To analyze the registration status of acute pancreatitis-related clinical studies registered on the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR) and USA ClinicalTrials.gov database.Methods:The ChiCTR and ClinicalTrials.gov database were searched to collect, sort and analyze the clinical studies related to acute pancreatitis registered from the establishment of the database to December 31, 2020. The clinical trials were manually grouped, and the features of clinical researches were compared based on different registered data (2007-2014 vs 2015-2020) and different financial sources (self-support, enterprise support or public support). Results:A total of 157 registered clinical studies related to acute pancreatitis have been included (ChiCTR n=99; ClinicalTrial.gov n=58). The top three areas with the greatest number of registered clinical studies were Sichuan (28.0%), Shanghai (14.6%) and Jiangsu (12.1%), totally accounting for 54.7%. There were 91 interventional studies, 41 observational studies and 25 other type studies. Masking was performed in 34 studies (21.6%). Randomized parallel controlling was performed in 84 studies (53.5%). 30 trials (19.1%) were at Ⅳ phase, and 7 trials (4.4%) were at Ⅱ or Ⅲ phase. 2007-2014 group tended to use randomized parallel controlled design (68.3% vs 45.4%, P=0.005) and randomization grouping (76.7% vs 47.4%, P=0.001). 2015-2020 group tended to use relatively large sample (72.6% vs 47.4%, P=0.002)and data management committee (53.6% vs 25.0%, P=0.001). The differences between the two groups were statistically significant. Of 92 trials from ChiCTR database, 48 were self-supported, 5 was supported by enterprise, and 38 was supported by the public. The percentage of self-support and public support was 86.9%. Conclusions:The number of acute pancreatitis-related clinical studies registered on ChiCTR was generally on the increase. Most registered studies were funded by public finances or by the researchers' institutions self. There was a lack of phaseⅡ or phase Ⅲ.