From protocols to publications: A study in selective reporting of outcomes in randomized trials in oncology

Journal of Clinical Oncology

Volumn 33, Issue 31, 2015, Pages 3583-3590

  Raghav, Kanwal Pratap Singh ^a   Mahajan, Sminil ^a   Yao, James C ^a   Hobbs, Brian P ^a   Berry, Donald A ^a   Pentz, Rebecca D ^b   Tam, Alda ^a   Hong, Waun K ^a   Ellis, Lee M ^a   Abbruzzese, James ^c   Overman, Michael J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MD ANDERSON CANCER CENTER   (United States)

^b EMORY UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^c DUKE CANCER INSTITUTE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CANCER SURVIVAL; CLINICAL PRACTICE; DISEASE FREE INTERVAL; DISEASE FREE SURVIVAL; EVENT FREE SURVIVAL; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; HUMAN; MEDLINE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATIENT CARE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGRESSION FREE SURVIVAL; PUBLICATION; QUALITY OF LIFE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); RECURRENCE FREE SURVIVAL; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; SYSTEMIC THERAPY; METHODOLOGY; NEOPLASMS; ONCOLOGY; PROCEDURES; PUBLISHING; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; HUMANS; MEDICAL ONCOLOGY; NEOPLASMS; PATIENT OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PERIODICALS AS TOPIC; PUBLICATION BIAS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; RESEARCH DESIGN; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 84947290122     PISSN: 0732183X     EISSN: 15277755     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2015.62.4148     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Hopewell S, Loudon K, Clarke MJ, et al: Publication bias in clinical trials due to statistical significance or direction of trial results. Cochrane Database Syst Rev MR000006, 2009
2. Dwan K, Altman DG, Cresswell L, et al: Comparison of protocols and registry entries to published reports for randomized controlled trials. Cochrane Database Syst Rev MR000031, 2011
3. 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 340:c365, 2010
4. Franco A, Malhotra N, Simonovits G: Social science: Publication bias in the social sciences-Unlocking the file drawer. Science 345:1502-1505, 2014
5. Turner EH, Matthews AM, Linardatos E, et al: Selective publication of antidepressant trials and its influence on apparent efficacy. N Engl J Med 358: 252-260, 2008
6. Begg C, Cho M, Eastwood S, et al: Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials: The CONSORT statement. JAMA 276:637-639, 1996
7. De Angelis CD, Drazen JM, Frizelle FA, et al: Is this clinical trial fully registered? A statement from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. N Engl J Med 352:2436-2438, 2005
8. Laine C, Horton R, DeAngelis CD, et al: Clinical trial registration: Looking back and moving ahead. N Engl J Med 356:2734-2736, 2007
9. Vedula SS, Bero L, Scherer RW, et al: Outcome reporting in industry-sponsored trials of gabapentin for off-label use. N Engl J Med 361:1963-1971, 2009
10. Haller DG, Cannistra SA: Providing protocol information for J Clin Oncol readers: What practicing clinicians need to know. J Clin Oncol 29:1091, 2011
11. Djulbegovic B, Lacevic M, Cantor A, et al: The uncertainty principle and industry-sponsored research. Lancet 356:635-638, 2000
12. Lexchin J, Bero LA, Djulbegovic B, et al: Pharmaceutical industry sponsorship and research outcome and quality: Systematic review. BMJ 326: 1167-1170, 2003
13. 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 291:2457-2465, 2004
14. Al-Marzouki S, Roberts I, Evans S, et al: Selective reporting in clinical trials: Analysis of trial protocols accepted by The Lancet. Lancet 372:201, 2008
15. Chan AW, Krleza-Jeric K, Schmid I, et al: Outcome reporting bias in randomized trials funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. CMAJ 171:735-740, 2004
16. Easterbrook PJ, Berlin JA, Gopalan R, et al: Publication bias in clinical research. Lancet 337:867-872, 1991
17. Chan AW: Bias, spin, and misreporting: Time for full access to trial protocols and results. PLoS Med 5:e230, 2008
18. Zarin DA, Tse T: Medicine: Moving toward transparency of clinical trials. Science 319:1340-1342, 2008
19. Krleza-Jeric K, Chan AW, Dickersin K, et al: Principles for international registration of protocol information and results from human trials of health related interventions: Ottawa statement (part 1). BMJ 330:956-958, 2005
20. Glasziou P, Macleod M, Chalmers I, et al: Research: Increasing value, reducing waste-Authors' reply. Lancet 383:1126-1127, 2014
21. Hartung DM, Zarin DA, Guise JM, et al: Reporting discrepancies between the ClinicalTrials.gov results database and peer-reviewed publications. Ann Intern Med 160:477-483, 2014
22. Anderson ML, Chiswell K, Peterson ED, et al: Compliance with results reporting at ClinicalTrials-.gov. N Engl J Med 372:1031-1039, 2015
23. Punt CJ, Buyse M, Kohne CH, et al: End points in adjuvant treatment trials: A systematic review of the literature in colon cancer and proposed definitions for future trials. J Natl Cancer Inst 99: 998-1003, 2007
24. Chan AW, Tetzlaff JM, Altman DG, et al: SPIRIT 2013 statement: Defining standard protocol items for clinical trials. Ann Intern Med 158:200-207, 2013
25. Hudis CA, Barlow WE, Costantino JP, et al: Proposal for standardized definitions for efficacy end points in adjuvant breast cancer trials: The STEEP system. J Clin Oncol 25:2127-2132, 2007
26. Zarin DA, Tse T, Sheehan J: The proposed rule for US clinical trial registration and results submission. N Engl J Med 372:174-180, 2015
27. Saad ED, Katz A: Progression-free survival and time to progression as primary end points in advanced breast cancer: Often used, sometimes loosely defined. Ann Oncol 20:460-464, 2009
28. Al-Marzouki S, Roberts I, Marshall T, et al: The effect of scientific misconduct on the results of clinical trials: A Delphi survey. Contemp Clin Trials 26:331-337, 2005
29. Schulz KF, Grimes DA: Multiplicity in randomized trials I: End points and treatments. Lancet 365:1591-1595, 2005
30. Schulz KF, Grimes DA: Multiplicity in randomized trials II: Subgroup and interim analyses. Lancet 365:1657-1661, 2005
31. Tannock IF: False-positive results in clinical trials: Multiple significance tests and the problem of unreported comparisons. J Natl Cancer Inst 88:206-207, 1996
32. Brookes ST, Whitley E, Peters TJ, et al: Subgroup analyses in randomized controlled trials: Quantifying the risks of false-positives and false-negatives. Health Technol Assess 5:1-56, 2001
33. Sun X, Briel M, Busse JW, et al: Credibility of claims of subgroup effects in randomised controlled trials: Systematic review. BMJ 344:e1553, 2012
34. Berry D: Multiplicities in cancer research: Ubiquitous and necessary evils. J Natl Cancer Inst 104:1124-1132, 2012
35. Lagakos SW: The challenge of subgroup analyses: Reporting without distorting. N Engl J Med 354:1667-1669, 2006
36. van Assen MA, van Aert RC, Nuijten MB, et al: Why publishing everything is more effective than selective publishing of statistically significant results. PLoS One 9:e84896, 2014
37. Bedard PL, Krzyzanowska MK, Pintilie M, et al: Statistical power of negative randomized controlled trials presented at American Society for Clinical Oncology annual meetings. J Clin Oncol 25:3482-3487, 2007
38. Institute of Medicine: Sharing clinical trial data: Maximizing benefits, minimizing risk. Washington, DC, National Academies Press, 2015