Quality of reporting of phase II trials: A focus on highly ranked oncology journals

Annals of Oncology

Volumn 25, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 536-541

  Grellety, T ^a   Petit Moneger A ^a   Diallo, A ^a   Mathoulin Pelissier, S ^a,b   Italiano, A ^a  

^a INSTITUT BERGONIÉ   (France)

^b UNIVERSITÉ DE BORDEAUX   (France)

Author keywords

Clinical trials; Oncology; Phase II trials; Quality of reporting

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CANCER REGISTRY; CANCER RESEARCH; CONTENT ANALYSIS; EXPLORATORY RESEARCH; JOURNAL IMPACT FACTOR; PEER REVIEW; PHASE 3 CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTOCOL COMPLIANCE; PUBLICATION; QUALITY CONTROL; SAMPLE SIZE; SCORING SYSTEM; HUMAN; NEOPLASMS; PHASE 2 CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); PUBLISHING; RESEARCH; STANDARDS; TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT;

CLINICAL TRIALS, PHASE II AS TOPIC; EDITORIAL POLICIES; HUMANS; JOURNAL IMPACT FACTOR; NEOPLASMS; QUALITY IMPROVEMENT; RESEARCH REPORT;

EID: 84893429260     PISSN: 09237534     EISSN: 15698041     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdt550     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Mariani L, Marubini E. Content and quality of currently published phase II cancer trials. J Clin Oncol 2000; 18: 429-436.
2. Walker I, Newell H. Do molecularly targeted agents in oncology have reduced attrition rates? Nat Rev Drug Discov 2009; 8: 15-16.
3. Cannistra SA. Phase II trials in journal of clinical oncology. J Clin Oncol 2009; 27: 3073-3076.
4. Begg C, Cho M, Eastwood S et al. Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials. The CONSORT statement. JAMA 1996; 276: 637-639.
5. Moher D, Jones A, Lepage L et al. Use of the CONSORT statement and quality of reports of randomized trials: a comparative before-and-after evaluation. JAMA 2001; 285: 1992-1995.
6. Thomson Reuters. 2011 Journal Citation Reports, Science Edition. Thomson Reuters.
7. Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D et al. CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. PLoS Med 2010; 7: 1000251.
8. Chang SM, Reynolds SL, Butowski N et al. GNOSIS: guidelines for neuro-oncology: standards for investigational studies-reporting of phase I and phase II clinical trials. Neuro Oncol 2005; 7: 425-434.
9. Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J et al. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer 2009; 45: 228-247.
10. Ford R, Schwartz L, Dancey J et al. Lessons learned from independent central review. Eur J Cancer 2009; 45: 268-274.
11. Adjei AA, Christian M, Ivy P. Novel designs and end points for phase II clinical trials. Clin Cancer Res 2009; 15: 1866-1872.
12. Mandrekar SJ, Sargent DJ. Randomized phase II trials: time for a new era in clinical trial design. J Thorac Oncol 2010; 5: 932-934.
13. Ratain MJ, Sargent DJ. Optimising the design of phase II oncology trials: the importance of randomisation. Eur J Cancer 2009; 45: 275-280.
14. Seymour L, Ivy SP, Sargent D et al. The design of phase II clinical trials testing cancer therapeutics: consensus recommendations from the clinical trial design task force of the national cancer institute investigational drug steering committee. Clin Cancer Res 2010; 16: 1764-1769.
15. De Angelis C, Drazen JM, Frizelle FA et al. Clinical trial registration: a statement from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. CMAJ 2004; 171: 606-607.
16. Lai R, Chu R, Fraumeni M. Quality of randomized controlled trials reporting in the primary treatment of brain tumors. J Clin Oncol 2006; 24: 1136-1144.
17. Toulmonde M, Bellera C, Mathoulin-Pelissier S et al. Quality of randomized controlled trials reporting in the treatment of sarcomas. J Clin Oncol 2011; 29: 1204-1209.
18. Ottaiano A, Facchini G, Nasti G et al. Phase II studies of anticancer chemotherapy: indirect evidence of poor quality. Ann Oncol 2007; 18: 403.
19. Thezenas S, Duffour J, Culine S et al. Five-year change in statistical designs of phase II trials published in leading cancer journals. Eur J Cancer 2004; 40: 1244-1249.
20. Allegro S, Pond G, Hotte SJ et al. The unclear zone in phase II clinical trials. Eur J Cancer 2010; 46: 2408-2413.
21. Soares HP, Daniels S, Kumar A et al. Bad reporting does not mean bad methods for randomised trials: observational study of randomised controlled trials performed by the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group. BMJ 2004; 328: 22-24.
22. Huwiler-Müntener K, Jüni P, Junker C et al. Quality of reporting of randomized trials as a measure of methodologic quality. JAMA 2002; 287: 2801-2804.
23. Haller DG, Cannistra SA. Providing protocol information for Journal of Clinical Oncology readers: what practicing clinicians need to know. J Clin Oncol 2011; 29: 1091.
24. Summerskill W, Collingridge D, Frankish H. Protocols, probity, and publication. Lancet 2009; 373: 992.
25. Chan AW, Tetzlaff JM, Altman DG et al. SPIRIT 2013 statement: defining standard protocol items for clinical trials. Ann Intern Med 2013; 158: 200-207.
26. Moher D, Simera I, Schulz KF et al. Helping editors, peer reviewers and authors improve the clarity, completeness and transparency of reporting health research. BMC Med 2008; 6: 13. Volume