Statistical controversies in clinical research: Comparison of primary outcomes in protocols, public clinical-trial registries and publications: The example of oncology trials

Annals of Oncology

Volumn 28, Issue 4, 2017, Pages 688-695

  Perlmutter, A S ^a   Tran, V T ^b,c   Dechartres, A ^b,c,d   Ravaud, P ^a,b,c,d  

^a Mailman School of Public Health   (United States)

^b PARIS DESCARTES UNIVERSITY   (France)

^c ASSISTANCE PUBLIQUE HÔPITAUX DE PARIS   (France)

^d UNIVERSITÉ PARIS DESCARTES   (France)

Author keywords

Clinical trials; Methodology; Outcome reporting bias; Protocols

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL PROTOCOL; CLINICAL RESEARCH; CLINICAL STUDY; COMPARATIVE STUDY; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; ONCOLOGY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PHASE 3 CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLICATION; QUALITY CONTROL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); REGISTER; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL BIAS; MEDICAL RESEARCH; STANDARDS;

BIAS (EPIDEMIOLOGY); BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; CLINICAL TRIALS, PHASE III AS TOPIC; HUMANS; MEDICAL ONCOLOGY; REGISTRIES; RESEARCH DESIGN;

EID: 85019136519     PISSN: 09237534     EISSN: 15698041     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdw682     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Kirkham JJ, Dwan KM, Altman DG et al. The impact of outcome reporting bias in randomised controlled trials on a cohort of systematic reviews. Br Med J 2010; 340: c365.
2. Raghav KP, Mahajan S, Yao JC et al. From protocols to publications: a study in selective reporting of outcomes in randomized trials in oncology. J Clin Oncol 2015; 33: 3583-3590.
3. Dwan K, Gamble C, Williamson PR, Kirkham JJ. Systematic review of the empirical evidence of study publication bias and outcome reporting bias-an updated review. PLoS ONE 2013; 8: e66844.
4. Mathieu S, Boutron I, Moher D et al. Comparison of registered and published primary outcomes in randomized controlled trials. JAMA 2009; 302: 977-984.
5. Sylvester R, Van Glabbeke M, Collette L et al. Statistical methodology of phase III cancer clinical trials: advances and future perspectives. Eur J Cancer 2002; 38(Suppl 4): S162-S168.
6. 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: 210-216.
7. Chan AW. Bias, spin, and misreporting: time for full access to trial protocols and results. PLoS Med 2008; 5: e230.
8. DeAngelis CD, Drazen JM, Frizelle FA et al. Clinical trial registration: a statement from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. JAMA 2004; 292: 1363-1364.
9. Zarin DA, Tse T. Trust but verify: trial registration and determining fidelity to the protocol. Ann Intern Med 2013; 159: 65-67.
10. 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 2004; 291: 2457-2465.
11. Redmond S, von Elm E, Blumle A et al. Cohort study of trials submitted to ethics committee identified discrepant reporting of outcomes in publications. J Clin Epidemiol 2013; 66: 1367-1375.
12. Jones CW, Keil LG, Holland WC et al. Comparison of registered and published outcomes in randomized controlled trials: a systematic review. BMC Med 2015; 13: 282.
13. Wieseler B, Wolfram N, McGauran N et al. Completeness of reporting of patient-relevant clinical trial outcomes: comparison of unpublished clinical study reports with publicly available data. PLoS Med 2013; 10: e1001526.
14. Wieseler B, Kerekes MF, Vervoelgyi V et al. Impact of document type on reporting quality of clinical drug trials: a comparison of registry reports, clinical study reports, and journal publications. Br Med J 2012; 344: d8141.
15. Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D. CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. Br Med J 2010; 340: c332.
16. Zarin DA, Tse T, Williams RJ et al. The ClinicalTrials.gov results database-update and key issues. N Engl J Med 2011; 364: 852-860.
17. Chan AW, Tetzlaff JM, Gotzsche PC et al. SPIRIT 2013 explanation and elaboration: guidance for protocols of clinical trials. Br Med J 2013; 346: e7586.
18. Bakitas MA, Tosteson TD, Li Z et al. Early versus delayed initiation of concurrent palliative oncology care: patient outcomes in the ENABLE III randomized controlled trial. J Clin Oncol 2015; 33: 1438-1445.
19. Fernando HC, Landreneau RJ, Mandrekar SJ et al. Impact of brachytherapy on local recurrence rates after sublobar resection: results from ACOSOG Z4032 (Alliance), a phase III randomized trial for high-risk operable non-small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol 2014; 32: 2456-2462.
20. Tse T, Williams RJ, Zarin DA. Reporting "basic results" in ClinicalTrials.gov. Chest 2009; 136: 295-303.
21. Zarin DA, Tse T, Ide NC. Trial Registration at ClinicalTrials.gov between May and October 2005. N Engl J Med 2005; 353: 2779-2787.
22. Williamson P, Clarke M. The COMET (Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials) initiative: its role in improving cochrane reviews. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012; Ed000041.
23. Chan AW, Upshur R, Singh JA et al. Research protocols: waiving confidentiality for the greater good. Br Med J 2006; 332: 1086-1089.
24. Chauvin A, Ravaud P, Baron G et al. The most important tasks for peer reviewers evaluating a randomized controlled trial are not congruent with the tasks most often requested by journal editors. BMC Med 2015; 13: 158.
25. Smyth RM, Kirkham JJ, Jacoby A et al. Frequency and reasons for outcome reporting bias in clinical trials: interviews with trialists. Br Med J 2011; 342: c7153.
26. Larkin J, Chiarion-Sileni V, Gonzalez R et al. Combined nivolumab and ipilimumab or monotherapy in untreated melanoma. N Engl J Med 2015; 373: 23-34.
27. Eijzenga W, Aaronson NK, Hahn DE et al. Effect of routine assessment of specific psychosocial problems on personalized communication, counselors' awareness, and distress levels in cancer genetic counseling practice: a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Oncol 2014; 32: 2998-3004.
28. Hartung DM, Zarin DA, Guise JM et al. Reporting discrepancies between the ClinicalTrials.gov results database and peer-reviewed publications. Ann Intern Med 2014; 160: 477-483.
29. Riveros C, Dechartres A, Perrodeau E et al. Timing and completeness of trial results posted at ClinicalTrials.gov and published in journals. PLoS Med 2013; 10: e1001566. discussion e1001566.
30. Goldacre B, Drysdale H, Powell-Smith A et al. The COMPare Trials Project. 2016; www.COMPare-trials.org (14 March 2017, date last accessed).
31. Cannistra SA. New initiatives at Journal of Clinical Oncology. J Clin Oncol 2011; 29: 2609-2610.