Evidence Hub

Lack of diversity in antifibrotic trials for pulmonary fibrosis: a systematic review

Pascoe A, Chen XE, Smallwood N

European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society, 2025

10 participants · 6 citations

Abstract

Introduction: Social determinants of health (SDH), including age, sex, ethnicity, socioeconomic status and rurality, influence health outcomes. Clinical trials investigating antifibrotic agents for people with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) have been conducted in predominantly White and male populations; it is unclear whether other SDH have been considered. This study aimed to investigate active consideration and reporting of SDH in clinical trials of antifibrotic agents for people with IPF.

Methods: Three registries (ClinicalTrials.gov, ANZCTR and International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN)) plus CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) were searched for clinical trials investigating antifibrotic agents for people with IPF or various progressive fibrotic ILD variants registered from 1 January 2000 until 3 September 2023. Data were extracted regarding trial phase/status, recruitment strategies and eligibility criteria. If trial results were available, SDH data from demographics and subgroup analyses were extracted.

Results: Of 313 records identified, 70 trials were included. The majority of trials were phase II or III (77%), 56% were completed and 61% had reported results that included eight terminated trials. All 70 trials specified age and sex, but not other SDH, within their eligibility criteria. Of 43 trials reporting results, all reported age and sex and 40 (95%) reported ethnicity. 10 387 participants were described (74%…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 10 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free