Publication outcomes of phase II oncology clinical trials

American Journal of Clinical Oncology: Cancer Clinical Trials

Volumn 32, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 253-257

  Hoeg, Rasmus T ^a   Lee, Jennifer A ^a   Mathiason, Michelle A ^a   Rokkones, Kristina ^a   Serck, Stephanie L ^b   Crampton, Kaye L ^b   Emmel, Ann E ^b   Severson, Eileen A ^b   Go, Ronald S ^b  

^a Gundersen Lutheran Medical Foundation   (United States)

^b GUNDERSEN LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Oncology trials; Phase II; Publication outcome

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CANCER CLASSIFICATION; CLINICAL TRIAL; EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICE; FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION; HUMAN; MEDICAL LITERATURE; MEDICAL SOCIETY; NEOPLASM; ONCOLOGY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PUBLICATION; SELF REPORT; TIME; TREATMENT RESPONSE; TREND STUDY;

CLINICAL TRIALS, PHASE II AS TOPIC; CONGRESSES AS TOPIC; HUMANS; MEDICAL ONCOLOGY; PUBLICATIONS; SOCIETIES, MEDICAL; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 67749145692     PISSN: 02773732     EISSN: 1537453X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/COC.0b013e3181845544     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Callaham ML, Wears RL, Weber EJ, et al. Positive-outcome bias and other limitations in the outcome of research abstracts submitted to a scientific meeting. JAMA. 1998;280:254-257.
2. Dickersin K, Rennie D. Registering clinical trials. JAMA. 2003;290:516-523.
3. Topol EJ. Failing the public health-rofecoxib, Merck, and the FDA. N Engl J Med. 2004;351:1707-1709.
4. Chalmers I. Underreporting research is scientific misconduct. JAMA. 1990; 263:1405-1408.
5. DeAngelis CD, Drazen JM, Frizelle FA, et al. Clinical trial registration: a statement from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. JAMA. 2004;292:1363-1364.
6. ClinicalTrials.gov: Search for clinical trials, 2007. Available at: http://clini-caltrials.gov/ct2/home.
7. National Cancer Institute: Search for clinical trials, 2007. Available at: http://www.nci.nih.gov/search/clinical-trials.
8. Krzyzanowska MK, Pintilie M, Tannock IF. Factors associated with failure to publish large randomized trials presented at an oncology meeting. JAMA. 2003;290:495-501.
9. Camacho LH, Bacik J, Cheung A, et al. Presentation and subsequent publication rates of phase I oncology clinical trials. Cancer. 2005;104:1497-1504.
10. De Bellefeuille C, Morrison CA, Tannock IF. The fate of abstracts submitted to a cancer meeting: factors which influence presentation and subsequent publication. Ann Oncol. 1992;3:187-191.
11. Scherer RW, Langenberg P, von Elm E. Full publication of results initially presented in abstracts. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007;2:MR000005.
12. Hopewell S, Clarke M, Askie L. Reporting of trials presented in conference abstracts needs to be improved. J Clin Epidemiol. 2006;59:681-684.
13. Gøtzsche PC, Hróbjartsson A, Johansen HK, et al. Ghost authorship in industry-initiated randomised trials. PLoS Med. 2007;4:e19.
14. Vickers AJ, Ballen V, Scher HI. Setting the bar in phase II trials: the use of historical data for determining "go/no go" decision for definitive phase III testing. Clin Cancer Res. 2007;13:972-976.
15. Johnson JR, Williams G, Pazdur R. End points and United States Food and Drug Administration approval of oncology drugs. J Clin Oncol. 2003;21: 1404-1411.
16. Jenkins V, Fallowfield L. Reasons for accepting or declining to participate in randomized clinical trials for cancer therapy. Br J Cancer. 2000;82:1783- 1788.
17. Madsen SM, Mirza MR, Holm S, et al. Attitudes towards clinical research amongst participants and nonparticipants. J Intern Med. 2002;251:156-168.
18. Pfeffer C, Olsen BR. Editorial:Journal of Negative Results in Biomedicine. J Negat Results Biomed. 2002;1:e2.
19. Veitch E. Introducing PLoS clinical trials: a different approach to publishing trial results. PLoS Clin Trials. 2006;1:e8.