Industry sponsorship and publication bias among animal studies evaluating the effects of statins on atherosclerosis and bone outcomes: A meta-analysis

BMC Medical Research Methodology

Volumn 15, Issue 1, 2015, Pages

  Anglemyer, Andrew T ^a   Krauth, David ^a   Bero, Lisa ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Animal experimentation; Bias; Drug industry; Meta analysis; Publication bias

Indexed keywords

HYDROXYMETHYLGLUTARYL COENZYME A REDUCTASE INHIBITOR;

ANIMAL; ATHEROSCLEROSIS; BONE; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DRUG EFFECTS; DRUG INDUSTRY; ECONOMICS; META ANALYSIS; METABOLISM; PRECLINICAL STUDY; PROCEDURES; PUBLISHING; RESEARCH; STANDARDS; STATISTICAL MODEL; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

ANIMALS; ATHEROSCLEROSIS; BONE AND BONES; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DRUG EVALUATION, PRECLINICAL; DRUG INDUSTRY; HYDROXYMETHYLGLUTARYL-COA REDUCTASE INHIBITORS; LINEAR MODELS; PUBLICATION BIAS; RESEARCH REPORT; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 84924991883     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14712288     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/s12874-015-0008-z     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Van der Worp HB, Howells DW, Sena ES, Porritt MJ, Rewell S, O'Collins V, et al. Can animal models of disease reliably inform human studies? PLoS Med. 2010;7(3):e1000245.
2. Perel P, Roberts I, Sena E, Wheble P, Briscoe C, Sandercock P, et al. Comparison of treatment effects between animal experiments and clinical trials: systematic review. BMJ. 2007;334(7586):197.
3. Pound P, Ebrahim S, Sandercock P, Bracken MB, Roberts I, Group RATS (RATS). Where is the evidence that animal research benefits humans? BMJ. 2004;328(7438):514.
4. O'Collins VE, Macleod MR, Donnan GA, Horky LL, Van der Worp BH, Howells DW. 1,026 experimental treatments in acute stroke. Ann Neurol. 2006;59(3):467-77.
5. Tsilidis KK, Panagiotou OA, Sena ES, Aretouli E, Evangelou E, Howells DW, et al. Evaluation of excess significance bias in animal studies of neurological diseases. PLoS Biol. 2013;11(7):e1001609.
6. Chan A-W, Altman DG. Identifying outcome reporting bias in randomised trials on PubMed: review of publications and survey of authors. BMJ. 2005;330(7494):753.
7. Chan A-W, Hróbjartsson A, Haahr MT, Gøtzsche PC, Altman DG. Empirical evidence for selective reporting of outcomes in randomized trials: comparison of protocols to published articles. JAMA. 2004;291(20):2457-65.
8. Dickersin K, Chan SS, Chalmersx TC, Sacks HS, Smith Jr H. Publication bias and clinical trials. Control Clin Trials. 1987;8(4):343-53.
9. Dickersin K, Min Y-I, Meinert CL. Factors influencing publication of research results: follow-up of applications submitted to two institutional review boards. JAMA. 1992;267(3):374-8.
10. Lee KP, Boyd EA, Holroyd-Leduc JM, Bacchetti P, Bero LA. Predictors of publication: characteristics of submitted manuscripts associated with acceptance at major biomedical journals. Med J Aust. 2006;184(12):621-6.
11. Rising K, Bacchetti P, Bero L. Reporting bias in drug trials submitted to the food and drug administration: review of publication and presenation. PLoS Med. 2008;5(11):1561-70.
12. Vedula SS, Bero L, Scherer RW, Dickersin K. Outcome reporting in industry-sponsored trials of gabapentin for off-label use. N Engl J Med. 2009;361(20):1963-71.
13. Soeken KL, Sripusanapan A. Assessing publication bias in meta-analysis. Nurs Res. 2003;52(1):57-60.
14. CAMARADES. Available from: http://www.CAMARADES.info.
15. Korevaar D, Hooft L, Ter Riet G. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of preclinical studies: publication bias in laboratory animal experiments. Lab Anim. 2011;45(4):225-30.
16. ter Riet G, Korevaar D, Leenaars M, Sterk P, van Noorden C, Bouter L, et al. Publication bias in laboratory animal research: a survey on magnitude, drivers, consequences and potential solutions. PLoS One. 2012;7(9):e43404.
17. Timmer A, Hilsden RJ, Cole J, Hailey D, Sutherland LR. Publication bias in gastroenterological research-a retrospective cohort study based on abstracts submitted to a scientific meeting. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2002;2(1):7.
18. Sena ES, Van der Worp HB, Bath PM, Howells DW, Macleod MR. Publication bias in reports of animal stroke studies leads to major overstatement of efficacy. PLoS Biol. 2010;8(3):e1000344.
19. Lundh A, Sismondo S, Lexchin J, Busuioc OA, and Bero L. Industry sponsorship and research outcome. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012,12: doi:10.1002/14651858.MR000033.pub2
20. Krauth D, Woodruff TJ, Bero L. Instruments for assessing risk of bias and other methodological criteria of published animal studies: a systematic review. Environ Health Perspect. 2013;121(9):985.
21. Krauth D, Anglemyer A, Phillips R, Bero L. Nonindustry-Sponsored Preclinical Studies on Statins Yield Greater Efficacy Estimates Than Industry-Sponsored Studies: A Meta-Analysis. PLoS Biol. 2014;12(1).
22. DerSimonian R, Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials. 1996;7:177-88.
23. Abdel-Sattar M, Krauth D, Anglemyer A, Bero L. The Relationship Between Risk of Bias Criteria, Research Outcomes, and Study Sponsorship in a Cohort of Preclinical Thiazolidinedione Animal Studies: A Meta-Analysis. Evidence-Based Preclin Med. 2015. In Press.
24. Macleod MR, O'Collins T, Horky LL, Howells DW, Donnan GA. Systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy of melatonin in experimental stroke. J Pineal Res. 2005;38(1):35-41.
25. Macleod M. Some salt with your statin, professor? PLoS Biol. 2014;12(1):e1001768.
26. Fanelli D, Ioannidis JP. US studies may overestimate effect sizes in softer research. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2013;110(37):15031-6.
27. Lynch JR, Cunningham MR, Warme WJ, Schaad DC, Wolf FM, Leopold SS. Commercially funded and United States-based research is more likely to be published; good-quality studies with negative outcomes are not. J Bone Joint Surg. 2007;89(5):1010-8.
28. Link A. US and Non-US submissions: an analysis of reviewer bias. JAMA. 1998;280(3):246-7.
29. Munafo M, Attwood A, Flint J. Bias in genetic association studies: effects of research location and resources. Psychol Med. 2008;38:1213-4.
30. Kilkenny C, Browne WJ, Cuthill IC, Emerson M, Altman DG. Improving bioscience research reporting: the ARRIVE guidelines for reporting animal research. Osteoarthr Carti. 2012;20(4):256-60.
31. Landis SC, Amara SG, Asadullah K, Austin C, Blumenstein R, Bradley E, et al. A call for transparent reporting to optimize the predictive value of preclinical research. Nature. 2012;490(7419):187-91.
32. De Angelis C, Drazen JM, Frizelle FA, Haug C, Hoey J, Horton R, et al. Clinical trial registration: a statement from the international committee of medical journal editors. N Engl J Med. 2004;351(12):1250-1.
33. Kimmelman J, Anderson JA. Should preclinical studies be registered? Nature Biotechnol. 2012;30(6):488-9.
34. Higgins Julian PT, Green S. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. 5.1.0 ed. The Cochrane Collaboration; 2011. Available from: www.cochrane-handbook.org.