Unveiling the truth: A journey into women’s representation in clinical trials
August 14, 2024 | Diversity, Inclusion, clinical trials, medicine development, research, women
We explore the historical exclusion of women from clinical trials, its consequences on medical research and treatment efficacy and the ongoing efforts to ensure their representation.
When we explore the history of our clinical trial world, it’s no secret, the voices and experiences of those assigned as women at birth have been missing for far too long.
But what sparked this in the first place? Let’s journey back in time together.
Back in the day
In the 1970s, decision-makers of clinical trials believed women’s hormonal cycles would twist, turn, and skew data. Men were seen as the ‘normal’ study population, while women were considered more biologically complex. Even more interestingly, people held an assumption that there were no significant differences in how men and women responded to treatment. It’s hard to believe these misguided thoughts existed, given how far our industry has advanced. 1,2
What’s more, even before the 1970s, women were often sidelined in medical research. And as some of us remember, the situation worsened after the thalidomide tragedy, sparking fears, leading to much stricter rules and regulations.1
Then 1977 happened.
This is when the FDA took a drastic step to ban women of reproductive potential from taking part in early-phase clinical trials. Originally intended as a protective measure, the policy was overly broad, also barring single women and those on contraception. Effectively shutting women out from crucial medical advancements.1
An incomplete picture
Of course, there are huge consequences to this which we all care about.
Excluding women from clinical trials limits understanding of how conditions manifest and how treatments work differently. And as we know, knowledge is power. So when we don’t have the insight and info we need, suboptimal treatment efficacy and undesirable adverse events become the stark reality.
But let’s dive deeper.
The missed opportunities
Not representing women in the way they deserve has left us with big gaps.
Take cardiovascular disease, for example. The leading cause of death for women in the US but with different symptoms, risk factors, and outcomes in women compared to men. Yet only one-third of all cardiovascular clinical trial participants are women. And only 31% of these trials report data by sex. And, as we all live and breathe, data is how we progress.3
What else?
As we know, women and men process drugs differently due to differences in body composition, hormonal cycles and enzyme activity. For example, women generally have a higher percentage of body fat and less body water, which can change how drugs are distributed and eliminated. When women are left out of clinical trials, we miss out on crucial insights into these differences. This can lead to dosing recommendations and safety profiles that aren’t tailored for women, risking overmedication or undermedication. Increasing the likelihood of adverse events and efficacy issues.4
But the saga continues.
We know women experience changes throughout life, such as with the menstrual cycle, pregnancy, and menopause. These hormonal fluctuations can influence how diseases manifest and how treatments work. For instance, the efficacy and side effects of certain medications can vary depending on the phase of the menstrual cycle.4
To get even more specific, we know hormonal changes throughout a woman’s life are linked to an increased risk of conditions like depression. And as we mentioned, women metabolise drugs in a different way to men, so why is it fewer than 45% of preliminary studies in depression and anxiety use female lab animals?5
Hypertension tells a similar tale too. We know the same approach to managing the condition is recommended in both men and women. But given how, historically, we’ve overlooked biological differences, this can’t be the most effective solution.5
So what can we do to address women’s representation?
In 1988 the FDA shone a spotlight on the importance of examining data for gender-based differences in safety and efficacy within their guidelines. And by 1993, they lifted the ban on women participating in clinical research. A crucial step forward. Following this, the National Institute of Health (NIH) outreach ‘Notebook’ was created to help support recruitment of women, advancing our strategy for women’s health.6
But even though women can now participate in most clinical trials they’re eligible for, representation still varies.6
How can we continue to make progress and improve representation?
It’s about making our communications clear, empathetic and personal. It’s about making everyone feel at home and included. And speaking of inclusion, we have to include everyone, including those who have been marginalised for far too long, such as the non-binary and transgender community. In fact, we’ll be diving into this further in our next blog, so stay tuned!
Ultimately, if we take these steps, we can make women feel like true partners and at the very heart of clinical trial design. As they always should have been.
References
- AAMC. Why we know so little about women’s health. Available here. Accessed: June 2024.
- wellandgood. Women were left out of clinical trials until the ‘90s – this is how it’s impacted our health. Available here. Accessed: June 2024.
- The Guardian. The medical research gender gap: how excluding women from clinical trials is hurting our health. Available here. Accessed: June 2024.
- DigitalCommons. A history of the representation of women in clinical trial: Implications for modern health care. Available here. Accessed: June 2024.
- Mastroianni AC, et al. Health Consequences of Exclusion or Underrepresentation of Women in Clinical Studies. In Women and Health Research: Ethical and Legal Issues of Including Women in Clinical Studies. Vol. 2; National Academies Press, 1999. DOI: 10.17226/2343.
- NIH. NIH Inclusion outreach toolkit: How to engage, recruit, and retain women in clinical research. Available here. Accessed: June 2024.
This content was provided by Cuttsy + Cuttsy
Company Details
Latest Content from Cuttsy + Cuttsy
Clinical research in 2026: The trends shaping tomorrow
Discover the key trends shaping clinical research in 2026, from patient-centric approaches to empowering site staff and fostering stronger human connections.
From overwhelming to actionable: Bringing lifestyle guidance to life
Discover how clear communication and health literacy principles can transform complex patient materials into simple, engaging, and empowering health information.
Behind the scenes: why we created ‘The participation equation’
Go behind the scenes of The participation equation – our call to put people, not just data, at the heart of clinical research.
Cuttsy+Cuttsy launches R:SQD – a new way to predict and improve trial success
Cuttsy+Cuttsy has launched R:SQD, an innovative recruitment and retention success scoring tool that helps clinical trial sponsors predict, measure, and improve participant engagement and trial outcomes.
New report, The participation equation, uncovers key drivers of patient engagement in clinical trials
Cuttsy+Cuttsy’s new report, The participation equation, uncovers what drives patient engagement and retention in modern clinical trials through insights from over 700 participants and industry experts.
Why patients drop out of weight management trials and what you can do about it
Discover the key barriers to retention in obesity and weight-management trials and explore actionable, patient-centered strategies to improve engagement, outcomes, and data reliability.
Cuttsy+Cuttsy welcomes new team members
Cuttsy+Cuttsy is excited to announce the addition of three talented professionals to the team: Flo, an enthusiastic Account Executive; Vicki, a creative Graphic Designer; and Jo, a detail-driven Artworker
Designing with patients in mind: How to build more inclusive clinical trials
Discover how patient-centred design transforms inclusive clinical trials. Learn to overcome trial recruitment challenges by listening to patients and creating studies that fit real lives.
Why fresh patient voices are critical to improve clinical trials outcomes
Discover why diverse patient voices, especially first-time participants, are key to improving clinical trials. Boost recruitment, retention, and patient-centric research.
Using patient personas to add a personal touch to clinical trial recruitment and retention
Discover how patient personas can revolutionise clinical trial recruitment and retention. Personalise outreach, build trust, and improve patient engagement.