Quality of reporting in oncology studies: A systematic analysis of literature reviews and prospects

Critical Reviews in Oncology/Hematology

Volumn 112, Issue , 2017, Pages 179-189

  Rivoirard, Romain ^a   Bourmaud, Aurélie ^b,c   Oriol, Mathieu ^b,d   Tinquaut, Fabien ^b   Méry, Benoîte ^a   Langrand Escure, Julien ^a   Vallard, Alexis ^a   Fournel, Pierre ^a   Magné, Nicolas ^a,c,d   Chauvin, Franck ^b,c,d  

^a Lucien Neuwirth Cancer Institute   (France)

^b Hygee Center   (France)

^c UNIVERSITÉ CLAUDE BERNARD LYON 1   (France)

^d UNIVERSITÉ JEAN MONNET   (France)

Author keywords

Data reporting; Observational study; Oncology; Randomized controlled trial; Review

Indexed keywords

COCHRANE LIBRARY; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; MEDLINE; OBSERVATIONAL STUDY; ONCOLOGY; PUBLICATION; QUALITY OF LIFE; RANDOMIZATION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; LITERATURE; STANDARDS;

HUMANS; MEDICAL ONCOLOGY; REVIEW LITERATURE AS TOPIC;

EID: 85015710037     PISSN: 10408428     EISSN: 18790461     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2017.02.012     Document Type: Review

References (78)

1. A proposal for structured reporting of randomized controlled trials, The standards of reporting trials group. JAMA 272 (1994), 1926–1931.
2. Arkenau, H.-T., Nordman, I., Dobbins, T., Ward, R., Reporting time-to-event endpoints and response rates in 4 decades of randomized controlled trials in advanced colorectal cancer. Cancer 117 (2011), 832–840.
3. Begg, C., Cho, M., Eastwood, S., Horton, R., Moher, D., Olkin, I., et al. Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials. The CONSORT statement. JAMA 276 (1996), 637–639.
4. Bekelman, J.E., Yahalom, J., Quality of radiotherapy reporting in randomized controlled trials of Hodgkin's lymphoma and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma: a systematic review. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 73 (2009), 492–498.
5. Black, N., Why we need observational studies to evaluate the effectiveness of health care. BMJ 312 (1996), 1215–1218.
6. Blencowe, N.S., McNair, A.G.K., Davis, C.R., Brookes, S.T., Blazeby, J.M., Standards of outcome reporting in surgical oncology: a case study in esophageal cancer. Ann. Surg. Oncol. 19 (2012), 4012–4018.
7. Blencowe, N.S., Chana, P., Whistance, R.N., Stevens, D., Wong N a, C.S., Falk, S.J., et al. Outcome reporting in neoadjuvant surgical trials: a systematic review of the literature and proposals for new standards. J. Natl. Cancer Inst., 106, 2014.
8. Bottomley, A., Efficace, F., Thomas, R., Vanvoorden, V., Ahmedzai, S.H., Health-related quality of life in non-small-cell lung cancer: methodologic issues in randomized controlled trials. J. Clin. Oncol. 21 (2003), 2982–2992.
9. Burton, A., Altman, D.G., Missing covariate data within cancer prognostic studies: a review of current reporting and proposed guidelines. Br. J. Cancer 91 (2004), 4–8.
10. Bylicki, O., Gan, H.K., Joly, F., Maillet, D., You, B., Péron, J., Poor patient-reported outcomes reporting according to CONSORT guidelines in randomized clinical trials evaluating systemic cancer therapy. Ann. Oncol. 26 (2015), 231–237.
11. Call for comments on a proposal to improve reporting of clinical trials in the biomedical literature, Working group on recommendations for reporting of clinical trials in the biomedical literature. Ann. Intern. Med. 121 (1994), 894–895.
12. ©Les cancers en France en, Collection état des lieux et des connaissances, ouvrage collectif édité par l (Les cancers en Franceen 2013. Collection état des lieux et des connaissances, ouvrage collectif édité par l'INCa, Boulogne-Billancourt janvier 2014 [in French]. 2013.
13. Cherny, N.I., Abernethy, A.P., Strasser, F., Sapir, R., Currow, D., Zafar, S.Y., Improving the methodologic and ethical validity of best supportive care studies in oncology: lessons from a systematic review. J. Clin. Oncol. 27 (2009), 5476–5486.
14. Claassens, L., van Meerbeeck, J., Coens, C., Quinten, C., Ghislain, I., Sloan, E.K., et al. Health-related quality of life in non-small-cell lung cancer: an update of a systematic review on methodologic issues in randomized controlled trials. J. Clin. Oncol. 29 (2011), 2104–2120.
15. Dirven, L., Taphoorn, M.J.B., Reijneveld, J.C., Blazeby, J., Jacobs, M., Pusic, A., et al. The level of patient-reported outcome reporting in randomised controlled trials of brain tumour patients: a systematic review. Eur. J. Cancer 50 (2014), 2432–2448.
16. Duff, J.M., Leather, H., Walden, E.O., LaPlant, K.D., George, T.J., Adequacy of published oncology randomized controlled trials to provide therapeutic details needed for clinical application. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 102 (2010), 702–705.
17. Efficace, F., Bottomley, A., Health related quality of life assessment methodology and reported outcomes in randomised controlled trials of primary brain cancer patients. Eur. J. Cancer 38 (2002), 1824–1831.
18. Efficace, F., Bottomley, A., Vanvoorden, V., Blazeby, J.M., Methodological issues in assessing health-related quality of life of colorectal cancer patients in randomised controlled trials. Eur. J. Cancer 40 (2004), 187–197.
19. Efficace, F., Horneber, M., Lejeune, S., Van Dam, F., Leering, S., Rottmann, M., et al. Methodological quality of patient-reported outcome research was low in complementary and alternative medicine in oncology. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 59 (2006), 1257–1265.
20. Efficace, F., Osoba, D., Gotay, C., Sprangers, M., Coens, C., Bottomley, A., Has the quality of health related quality of life reporting in cancer clinical trials improved over time?: Towards bridging the gap with clinical decision making. Ann. Oncol. 18 (2007), 775–781.
21. Efficace, F., Jacobs, M., Pusic, A., Greimel, E., Piciocchi, A., Kieffer, J.M., et al. Patient-reported outcomes in randomised controlled trials of gynaecological cancers: investigating methodological quality and impact on clinical decision-making. Eur. J. Cancer 50 (2014), 1925–1941.
22. Efficace, F., Feuerstein, M., Fayers, P., Cafaro, V., Eastham, J., Pusic, A., et al. Patient-reported outcomes in randomised controlled trials of prostate cancer: methodological quality and impact on clinical decision making. Eur. Urol. 66 (2014), 416–427.
23. Ghimire, S., Kyung, E., Lee, H., Kim, E., Oncology trial abstracts showed suboptimal improvement in reporting: a comparative before-and-after evaluation using CONSORT for Abstract guidelines. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 67 (2014), 658–666.
24. Glasziou, P., Vandenbroucke, J.P., Chalmers, I., Assessing the quality of research. BMJ 328 (2004), 39–41.
25. Grellety, T., Petit-Monéger, A., Diallo, A., Mathoulin-Pelissier, S., Italiano, A., Quality of reporting of phase II trials: a focus on highly ranked oncology journals. Ann. Oncol. 25 (2014), 536–541.
26. Guo, J.-W., Sward, K.A., Beck, S.L., Staggers, N., Quality of reporting randomized controlled trials in cancer nursing research. Nurs. Res. 63 (2014), 26–35.
27. Guyatt, G.H., Oxman, A.D., Vist, G.E., Kunz, R., Falck-Ytter, Y., Alonso-Coello, P., et al. GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ 336 (2008), 924–926.
28. Hopewell, S., Clarke, M., Abstracts presented at the American Society of Clinical Oncology conference: how completely are trials reported?. Clin. Trials 2 (2005), 265–268.
29. Hopewell, S., Collins, G.S., Boutron, I., Yu, L.-M., Cook, J., Shanyinde, M., et al. Impact of peer review on reports of randomised trials published in open peer review journals: retrospective before and after study. BMJ, 349, 2014, g4145.
30. Hui, D., Arthur, J., Dalal, S., Bruera, E., Quality of the supportive and palliative oncology literature: a focused analysis on randomized controlled trials. Support. Care Cancer 20 (2012), 1779–1785.
31. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals., 2013 [cited 13/12/2014] Available from URL: www.icmje.org.
32. Ivers, N.M., Taljaard, M., Dixon, S., Bennett, C., McRae, A., Taleban, J., et al. Impact of CONSORT extension for cluster randomised trials on quality of reporting and study methodology: review of random sample of 300 trials, 2000–8. BMJ, 343, 2011, d5886.
33. Kober, T., Trelle, S., Engert, A., Reporting of randomized controlled trials in Hodgkin lymphoma in biomedical journals. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 98 (2006), 620–625.
34. Krzyzanowska, M.K., Pintilie, M., Brezden-Masley, C., Dent, R., Tannock, I.F., Quality of abstracts describing randomized trials in the proceedings of American Society of Clinical Oncology meetings: guidelines for improved reporting. J. Clin. Oncol. 22 (2004), 1993–1999.
35. Lai, R., Chu, R., Fraumeni, M., Thabane, L., Quality of randomized controlled trials reporting in the primary treatment of brain tumors. J. Clin. Oncol. 24 (2006), 1136–1144.
36. Le Tourneau, C., Michiels, S., Gan, H.K., Siu, L.L., Reporting of time-to-event end points and tracking of failures in randomized trials of radiotherapy with or without any concomitant anticancer agent for locally advanced head and neck cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 27 (2009), 5965–5971.
37. Lee, C.W., Chi, K.N., The standard of reporting of health-related quality of life in clinical cancertrials. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 53 (2000), 451–458.
38. Lu, L., Zeng, J., Chen, Y., Quality of reporting in randomized controlled trials conducted in China on the treatment of cancer pain. Expert Rev. Anticancer Ther. 11 (2011), 871–877.
39. Lu, L., Liao, M., Zeng, J., He, J., Quality of reporting and its correlates among randomized controlled trials on acupuncture for cancer pain: application of the CONSORT 2010 Statement and STRICTA. Expert Rev. Anticancer Ther. 13 (2013), 489–498.
40. Martin, R.C.G., Augenstein, V.A., Scoggins, C.R., McMasters, K.M., Quality of survival reporting in chemotherapy and surgery trials in patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma. Cancer 106 (2006), 1389–1394.
41. Mathoulin-Pelissier, S., Gourgou-Bourgade, S., Bonnetain, F., Kramar, A., Survival end point reporting in randomized cancer clinical trials: a review of major journals. J. Clin. Oncol. 26 (2008), 3721–3726.
42. Mhaskar, R., Djulbegovic, B., Magazin, A., Soares, H.P., Kumar, A., Published methodological quality of randomized controlled trials does not reflect the actual quality assessed in protocols. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 65 (2012), 602–609.
43. Mitchell, K.W., Carey, L.A., Peppercorn, J., Reporting of race and ethnicity in breast cancer research: room for improvement. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 118 (2009), 511–517.
44. Moher, D., Pham, B., Jones, A., Cook, D.J., Jadad, A.R., Moher, M., et al. Does quality of reports of randomised trials affect estimates of intervention efficacy reported in meta-analyses?. Lancet 352 (1998), 609–613.
45. Moher, D., Schulz, K.F., Altman, D.G., CONSORT: The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel group randomized trials. BMC Med. Res. Methodol., 1, 2001, 2.
46. Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D.G., PRISMA Group, Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med., 6, 2009, e1000097.
47. Péron, J., Pond, G.R., Gan, H.K., Chen, E.X., Almufti, R., Maillet, D., et al. Quality of reporting of modern randomized controlled trials in medical oncology: a systematic review. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 104 (2012), 982–989.
48. Péron, J., Maillet, D., Gan, H.K., Chen, E.X., You, B., Adherence to CONSORT adverse event reporting guidelines in randomized clinical trials evaluating systemic cancer therapy: a systematic review. J. Clin. Oncol. 31 (2013), 3957–3963.
49. Papathanasiou, A.A., Zintzaras, E., Assessing the quality of reporting of observational studies in cancer. Ann. Epidemiol. 20 (2010), 67–73.
50. Pat, K., Dooms, C., Vansteenkiste, J., Systematic review of symptom control and quality of life in studies on chemotherapy for advanced non-small cell lung cancer: how CONSORTed are the data?. Lung Cancer 62 (2008), 126–138.
51. Perrone, F., De Maio, E., Maione, P., Di Maio, M., Ottaiano, A., Pensabene, M., et al. Survey of modalities of toxicity assessment and reporting in noncomparative prospective studies of chemotherapy in breast cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 20 (2002), 52–57.
52. Potter, S., Brigic, A., Whiting, P.F., Cawthorn, S.J., Avery, K.N.L., Donovan, J.L., et al. Reporting clinical outcomes of breast reconstruction: a systematic review. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 103 (2011), 31–46.
53. Rennie, D., Suspended judgment. Editorial peer review: let us put it on trial. Control. Clin. Trials 13 (1992), 443–445.
54. Rennie, D., CONSORT revised–improving the reporting of randomized trials. JAMA 285 (2001), 2006–2007.
55. Riechelmann, R.P., Dounaevskaia, V., Krzyzanowska, M.K., Quality of reporting primary outcomes in phase II cancer trials. J. Clin. Oncol. 26 (2008), 5486–5488.
56. Süt, N., Senocak, M., Uysal, O., Köksalan, H., Assessing the quality of randomized controlled trials from two leading cancer journals using the CONSORT statement. Hematol. Oncol. Stem Cell Ther. 1 (2008), 38–43.
57. Scharf, O., Colevas, A.D., Adverse event reporting in publications compared with sponsor database for cancer clinical trials. J. Clin. Oncol. 24 (2006), 3933–3938.
58. Schulz, K.F., Altman, D.G., Moher, D., CONSORT Group: CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ, 340, 2010, c332.
59. Seruga, B., Sterling, L., Wang, L., Tannock, I.F., Reporting of serious adverse drug reactions of targeted anticancer agents in pivotal phase III clinical trials. J. Clin. Oncol. 29 (2011), 174–185.
60. Shitara, K., Ikeda, J., Kondo, C., Takahari, D., Ura, T., Muro, K., et al. Reporting patient characteristics and stratification factors in randomized trials of systemic chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer. Gastric Cancer 15 (2012), 137–143.
61. Sivendran, S., Latif, A., McBride, R.B., Stensland, K.D., Wisnivesky, J., Haines, L., et al. Adverse event reporting in cancer clinical trial publications. J. Clin. Oncol. 32 (2014), 83–89.
62. Soares, H.P., Daniels, S., Kumar, A., Clarke, M., Scott, C., Swann, S., 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 328 (2004), 22–24.
63. Sorbye, H., Köhne, C.-H., Sargent, D.J., Glimelius, B., Patient characteristics and stratification in medical treatment studies for metastatic colorectal cancer: a proposal for standardization of patient characteristic reporting and stratification. Ann. Oncol. 18 (2007), 1666–1672.
64. Sorensen, A.A., Wojahn, R.D., Manske, M.C., Calfee, R.P., Using the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement to assess reporting of observational trials in hand surgery. J. Hand Surg. Am. 38 (2013), 1584–1589 e2.
65. Swanson, G.M., Bailar, J.C., Selection and description of cancer clinical trials participants?science or happenstance?. Cancer 95 (2002), 950–959.
66. Tanaka, S., Kinjo, Y., Kataoka, Y., Yoshimura, K., Teramukai, S., Statistical issues and recommendations for noninferiority trials in oncology: a systematic review. Clin. Cancer Res. 18 (2012), 1837–1847.
67. Thezenas, S., Duffour, J., Culine, S., Kramar, A., Five-year change in statistical designs of phase II trials published in leading cancer journals. Eur. J. Cancer 40 (2004), 1244–1249.
68. Thoma, V., Bridoux, V., Lefebure, B., Wattiez, A., Nisand, I., Tuech, J.-J., Methodological and ethical quality in phase III?breast cancer trials. Med. Law 28 (2009), 637–648.
69. Toulmonde, M., Bellera, C., Mathoulin-Pelissier, S., Debled, M., Bui, B., Italiano, A., Quality of randomized controlled trials reporting in the treatment of sarcomas. J. Clin. Oncol. 29 (2011), 1204–1209.
70. Treweek, S., Incomplete reporting of recruitment information in breast cancer trials published between 2003 and 2008. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 64 (2011), 1216–1222.
71. Tuech, J.J., Pessaux, P., Moutel, G., Thoma, V., Schraub, S., Herve, C., Methodological quality and reporting of ethical requirements in phase III cancer trials. J. Med. Ethics 31 (2005), 251–255.
72. Vandenbroucke, J.P., von Elm, E., Altman, D.G., Gøtzsche, P.C., Mulrow, C.D., Pocock, S.J., et al. Strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE): explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med., 4, 2007, e297.
73. Vera-Badillo, F.E., Shapiro, R., Ocana, A., Amir, E., Tannock, I.F., Bias in reporting of end points of efficacy and toxicity in randomized, clinical trials for women with breast cancer. Ann. Oncol. 24 (2013), 1238–1244.
74. Von Elm, E., Altman, D.G., Egger, M., Pocock, S.J., Gøtzsche, P.C., Vandenbroucke, J.P., et al. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. PLoS Med., 4, 2007, e296.
75. World Health Organization, International Agency for Research on Cancer, GLOBOCAN2012: Estimated Cancer Incidence, Mortality and Prevalence Worldwide in 2012, Cancer Fact Sheets. 2017 [cited 12/12/2014]. Available from URL: http://globocan.iarc.fr/Pages/fact_sheets_cancer.aspx.
76. You, B., Gan, H.K., Pond, G., Chen, E.X., 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. 30 (2012), 210–216.
77. Zikos, E., Ghislain, I., Coens, C., Ediebah, D.E., Sloan, E., Quinten, C., et al. Health-related quality of life in small-cell lung cancer: a systematic review on reporting of methods and clinical issues in randomised controlled trials. Lancet Oncol. 15 (2014), e78–89.
78. Ziogas, D.C., Zintzaras, E., Analysis of the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials in acute and chronic myeloid leukemia, and myelodysplastic syndromes as governed by the CONSORT statement. Ann. Epidemiol. 19 (2009), 494–500.