NeuroThera effectiveness and safety trial 3: How do we align corporate and scientific integrity to complete and report pharma-sponsored trials properly?

Stroke

Volumn 45, Issue 11, 2014, Pages 3175-3177

  Levine, Steven R ^a,b   Hill, Michael D ^c  

^a STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK   (United States)

^b KINGS COUNTY HOSPITAL CENTER   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY   (Canada)

Author keywords

Clinical trials phase III; Ethics; Scientific integrity review

Indexed keywords

BRAIN ISCHEMIA; CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; CONTRACT; DEVICE THERAPY; EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICE; FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION; GOOD CLINICAL PRACTICE; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH CARE FINANCING; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HEALTH ECONOMICS; HUMAN; INVESTMENT; LOW LEVEL LASER THERAPY; PATIENT SAFETY; PHASE 2 CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); PHASE 3 CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTOCOL COMPLIANCE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); REVIEW; STROKE PATIENT; TREATMENT OUTCOME; BIOASSAY; FEMALE; MALE; PROCEDURES; STANDARDS; STROKE;

ENDPOINT DETERMINATION; FEMALE; HUMANS; LASER THERAPY; MALE; PATIENT SAFETY; STROKE;

EID: 84922482237     PISSN: 00392499     EISSN: 15244628     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.114.006750     Document Type: Review

References (13)

1. Hacke W, Schellinger PD, Albers GW, Bornstein NM, Dahlof BS, Fulton R, et al. Transcranial laser therapy in acute stroke treatment: results of Neurothera Effectiveness and Safety Trial 3, a phase III clinical end point device trial. Stroke. 2014;45:3187-3193.
2. Widler BE. Risk-based approach to clinical trial legislation-improvement options in the current and new legislation, 5th Annual Clinical Forum, Basel Switzerland, 2011. http://www.diahome.org/productfiles/25232/premeeting% 20presentation%20files/w1s2.-b.widler.pdf. Accessed July 22, 2014.
3. WMA Declaration of Helsinki-ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. http://www.wma.net/ en/30publications/10policies/b3/. Accessed July 24, 2014.
4. NEST 3 Web site. http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/results/NCT01120301. Accessed July 24,2014.
5. Pergolizzi JV. Early termination: conflicts and concerns. Clin Res. 2002;2:4-5.
6. Clark WM, Raps EC, Tong DC, Kelley RE. Cervene in acute ischemic stroke: results of a phase III randomized efficacy study. Stroke. 1999;30:234. Abstract.
7. Goldstein LB, Brott TG, Kothari RU, Smith WS. Clinical stroke trials: guarding against bias (editorial). Stroke. 1999;30:1165-1166.
8. STAIR I: Stroke Treatment Academic Industry Roundtable. Stroke drug development: bridging the gap from animal research to human trials. Stroke. 1999;30:2752-2758.
9. STAIR VIII: Stroke Treatment Academic Industry Roundtable. Accelerating the Evolution of Stroke Therapy. March 9-10, 2013, Washington, DC. http://www.thestair.org/content/stair-viii. Accessed July 30, 2014.
10. Ashcroft R. Responsibilities of sponsors are limited in premature discontinuation of trials. BMJ. 2001;323:53.
11. Lexchin J. Economics and industry do not mean ethical conduct in clinical trials. J Pharm Policy Pract. 2013,6:11. http://www.joppp.org/ content/6/1/11. Accessed July 22, 2014.
12. OpenSecrets.org: Center for Responsive Politics. Influence and Lobbying. Top Industries. https://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/top. php?indexType=i. Accessed July 30, 2014.
13. Lewis T, Reichman J, So A. The case for public funding and public oversight of clinical trials. Economists' Voice. 2007;4:1-4.