The reporting of adverse events in oncology phase III trials: A comparison of the current status versus the expectations of the EORTC members

Annals of Oncology

Volumn 27, Issue 1, 2016, Pages 192-198

  Maillet, D ^a   Blay, J Y ^b,c   You, B ^a,d   Rachdi, A ^a   Gan, H K ^e,f   Péron, Julien ^a,g  

^a HOSPICES CIVILS DE LYON   (France)

^b CENTRE LÉON BÉRARD   (France)

^c EORTC DATA CENTER   (Belgium)

^d UNIVERSITÉ LYON 1   (France)

^e AUSTIN HOSPITAL   (Australia)

^f LA TROBE UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^g LABORATOIRE DE BIOMÉTRIE ET BIOLOGIE EVOLUTIVE   (France)

Author keywords

Adverse events; CONSORT statement; EORTC; Grade 5 adverse events; Phase III trial reports

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; CANCER RESEARCH; CLINICAL PRACTICE; CLINICAL STUDY; DRUG SAFETY; DRUG SURVEILLANCE PROGRAM; DRUG TOLERABILITY; HEALTH CARE SURVEY; HEALTH PROGRAM; HUMAN; MEDICAL LITERATURE; MEDICAL SOCIETY; PHASE 3 CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLICATION; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; URINARY TRACT CANCER; COMPARATIVE STUDY; EUROPE; NEOPLASMS; PRACTICE GUIDELINE;

ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT;

ADVERSE DRUG REACTION REPORTING SYSTEMS; ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENTS; CLINICAL TRIALS, PHASE III AS TOPIC; EUROPE; HUMANS; NEOPLASMS; PRACTICE GUIDELINES AS TOPIC;

EID: 84960106030     PISSN: 09237534     EISSN: 15698041     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdv485     Document Type: Article

References (13)

1. Ioannidis JPA, Lau J. The impact of high-risk patients on the results of clinical trials. J Clin Epidemiol 1997; 50(10): 1089-98.
2. Altman DG, Schulz KF, Moher D et al. The Revised CONSORT Statement for Reporting Randomized Trials: explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med 2001; 134(8): 663-94.
3. Ioannidis JP, Evans SJ, Gøtzsche PC et al. Better reporting of harms in randomized trials: an extension of the CONSORT statement. Ann Intern Med 2004; 141(10): 781-8.
4. Pitrou I, Boutron I, Ahmad N, Ravaud P. REporting of safety results in published reports of randomized controlled trials. Arch Intern Med 2009; 169(19): 1756-61.
5. Vries TW, de van Roon EN. Low quality of reporting adverse drug reactions in paediatric randomised controlled trials. Arch Dis Child 2010; 95(12): 1023-6.
6. Haidich A-B, Birtsou C, Dardavessis T et al. The quality of safety reporting in trials is still suboptimal: survey of major general medical journals. J Clin Epidemiol 2011; 64(2): 124-35.
7. Breau RH, Gaboury I, Scales CD, Jr et al. Reporting of harm in randomized controlled trials published in the urological literature. J Urol 2010; 183(5): 1693-7.
8. Péron J, Maillet D, Gan HK, Chen EX, You B. Adherence to CONSORT adverse event reporting guidelines in randomized clinical trials evaluating systemic cancer therapy: a systematic review. JCO 2013; 31(31): 3957-63.
9. You B, Gan HK, Pond G, Chen EX. 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(2): 210-6.
10. Gan HK, You B, Pond GR, Chen EX. Assumptions of expected benefits in randomized phase III trials evaluating systemic treatments for cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2012; 104(8): 590-8.
11. Péron J, Pond GR, Gan HK et al. Quality of reporting of modern randomized controlled trials in medical oncology: a systematic review. J Natl Cancer Inst 2012; 104(13): 982-9.
12. Warren GW, Marshall JR, Cummings KM et al. Addressing tobacco use in patients with cancer: a survey of American Society of Clinical Oncology members. J Oncol Pract 2013; 9(5): 258-62.
13. Giro C, Berger B, Bölke E et al. High rate of severe radiation dermatitis during radiation therapy with concurrent cetuximab in head and neck cancer: results of a survey in EORTC institutes. Radiother Oncol 2009; 90(2): 166-71.