Bias in reporting of end points of efficacy and toxicity in randomized, clinical trials for women with breast cancer

Annals of Oncology

Volumn 24, Issue 5, 2013, Pages 1238-1244

  Vera badillo, F E ^a   Shapiro, R ^a   Ocana, A ^a   Amir, E ^a   Tannock, I F ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

Author keywords

Bias; Breast cancer; Clinical trials; Methodology

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; BREAST SURGERY; CANCER ADJUVANT THERAPY; CANCER RADIOTHERAPY; FUNDING; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; JOURNAL IMPACT FACTOR; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); SYSTEMATIC ERROR; SYSTEMIC THERAPY; THERAPY EFFECT;

EID: 84875139810     PISSN: 09237534     EISSN: 15698041     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mds636     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Ocana A, Tannock IF. When are 'positive' clinical trials in oncology truly positive?. J Natl Cancer Inst 2010; 103: 16-20.
2. Dwan K, Altman DG, Arnaiz JA et al. Systematic review of the empirical evidence of study publication bias and outcome reporting bias. PLoS One 2008; 3: e3081.
3. Chan AW, Hrobjartsson A, Haahr MT et al. Empirical evidence for selective reporting of outcomes in randomized trials: comparison of protocols to published articles. JAMA 2004; 291: 2457-2465.
4. Kirkham JJ, Altman DG, Williamson PR. Bias due to changes in specified outcomes during the systematic review process. PLoS One 2010; 5: e9810.
5. Ioannidis JP. Adverse events in randomized trials: neglected, restricted, distorted, and silenced. Arch Intern Med 2009; 169: 1737-1739.
6. Ioannidis JP, Evans SJ, Gotzsche PC et al. Better reporting of harms in randomized trials: an extension of the CONSORT statement. Ann Intern Med 2004; 141: 781-788.
7. Williamson PR, Gamble C, Altman DG et al. Outcome selection bias in metaanalysis. Stat Methods Med Res 2005; 14: 515-524.
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. Ioannidis JP. Why most published research findings are false. PLoS Med 2005; 2: e124.
10. Cuervo LG, Clarke M. Balancing benefits and harms in health care. BMJ 2003; 327: 65-66.
11. Pitrou I, Boutron I, Ahmad N et al. Reporting of safety results in published reports of randomized controlled trials. Arch Intern Med 2009; 169: 1756-1761.
12. Ioannidis JP. Limitations are not properly acknowledged in the scientific literature. J Clin Epidemiol 2007; 60: 324-329.
13. Barry HC, Ebell MH, Shaughnessy AF et al. Family physicians' use of medical abstracts to guide decision making: style or substance?. J Am Board Fam Pract 2001; 14: 437-442.
14. Burnand B, Kernan WN, Feinstein AR. Indexes and boundaries for 'quantitative significance' in statistical decisions. J Clin Epidemiol 1990; 43: 1273-1284.
15. Gianni L, Eiermann W, Semiglazov V et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with trastuzumab followed by adjuvant trastuzumab versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone, in patients with HER2-positive locally advanced breast cancer (the NOAH trial): a randomised controlled superiority trial with a parallel HER2-negative cohort. Lancet 2010; 375: 377-384.
16. Cortes J, O'Shaughnessy J, Loesch D et al. Eribulin monotherapy versus treatment of physician's choice in patients with metastatic breast cancer (EMBRACE): a phase 3 open-label randomised study. Lancet 2011; 377: 914-923.
17. Martin M, Segui MA, Anton A et al. Adjuvant docetaxel for high-risk, nodenegative breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2010; 363: 2200-2210.
18. Kirkham JJ, Dwan KM, Altman DG et al. The impact of outcome reporting bias in randomised controlled trials on a cohort of systematic reviews. BMJ 2010; 340: c365.
19. Boutron I, Dutton S, Ravaud P et al. Reporting and interpretation of randomized controlled trials with statistically nonsignificant results for primary outcomes. JAMA 2010; 303: 2058-2064.
20. Smyth RM, Kirkham JJ, Jacoby A et al. Frequency and reasons for outcome reporting bias in clinical trials: interviews with trialists. BMJ 2011; 342: c7153.
21. Rising K, Bacchetti P, Bero L. Reporting bias in drug trials submitted to the Food and Drug Administration: review of publication and presentation. PLoS Med 2008; 5: e217; discussion e217.
22. Siegel R, Ward E, Brawley O et al. Cancer statistics, 2011: the impact of eliminating socioeconomic and racial disparities on premature cancer deaths. CA Cancer J Clin 2011; 61: 212-236.
23. Pazdur R. Endpoints for assessing drug activity in clinical trials. Oncologist 2008; 13(Suppl 2): 19-21.
24. Booth CM, Eisenhauer EA. Progression-free survival: meaningful or simply measurable?. J Clin Oncol 2012; 30(10): 1030-1033.
25. Ocana A, Tannock IF. When are 'positive' clinical trials in oncology truly positive?. J Natl Cancer Inst 2011; 103: 16-20.
26. Amir E, Seruga B, Kwong R, Tannock IF, Ocaña A. Poor correlation between progression-free and overall survival in modern clinical trials: are composite endpoints the answer?. Eur J Cancer 2012; 48(3): 385-388.
27. You B, Gan HK, Pond G et al. Consistency in the analysis and reporting of primary end points in oncology randomized controlled trials from registration to publication: a systematic review. J Clin Oncol 2012; 30: 210-216.
28. http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/info/about. (16 March 2012, date last accessed).
29. https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/. (16 March 2012, date last accessed).