#PAGE_PARAMS# #ADS_HEAD_SCRIPTS# #MICRODATA#

Publication of Clinical Trials Supporting Successful New Drug Applications: A
Literature Analysis


Background:
The United States (US) Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approves new drugs based on

sponsor-submitted clinical trials. The publication status of these trials in the medical

literature and factors associated with publication have not been evaluated. We sought to

determine the proportion of trials submitted to the FDA in support of newly approved

drugs that are published in biomedical journals that a typical clinician, consumer, or

policy maker living in the US would reasonably search.

Methods and Findings:

We conducted a cohort study of trials supporting new drugs approved between 1998 and

2000, as described in FDA medical and statistical review documents and the FDA approved

drug label. We determined publication status and time from approval to full publication

in the medical literature at 2 and 5 y by searching PubMed and other databases through

01 August 2006. We then evaluated trial characteristics associated with publication. We

identified 909 trials supporting 90 approved drugs in the FDA reviews, of which

43% (394/909) were published. Among the subset of trials described in the

FDA-approved drug label and classified as “pivotal trials” for our

analysis, 76% (257/340) were published. In multivariable logistic regression

for all trials 5 y postapproval, likelihood of publication correlated with statistically

significant results (odds ratio [OR] 3.03, 95% confidence

interval [CI] 1.78–5.17); larger sample sizes (OR 1.33 per

2-fold increase in sample size, 95% CI 1.17–1.52); and pivotal

status (OR 5.31, 95% CI 3.30–8.55). In multivariable logistic

regression for only the pivotal trials 5 y postapproval, likelihood of publication

correlated with statistically significant results (OR 2.96, 95% CI

1. 24–7.06) and larger sample sizes (OR 1.47 per 2-fold increase in sample

size, 95% CI 1.15–1.88). Statistically significant results and

larger sample sizes were also predictive of publication at 2 y postapproval and in

multivariable Cox proportional models for all trials and the subset of pivotal

trials.

Conclusions:

Over half of all supporting trials for FDA-approved drugs remained unpublished ≥

5 y after approval. Pivotal trials and trials with statistically significant results and

larger sample sizes are more likely to be published. Selective reporting of trial

results exists for commonly marketed drugs. Our data provide a baseline for evaluating

publication bias as the new FDA Amendments Act comes into force mandating basic results

reporting of clinical trials.


Vyšlo v časopise: Publication of Clinical Trials Supporting Successful New Drug Applications: A Literature Analysis. PLoS Med 5(9): e191. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0050191
Kategorie: Research Article
prolekare.web.journal.doi_sk: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.0050191

Souhrn

Background:
The United States (US) Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approves new drugs based on

sponsor-submitted clinical trials. The publication status of these trials in the medical

literature and factors associated with publication have not been evaluated. We sought to

determine the proportion of trials submitted to the FDA in support of newly approved

drugs that are published in biomedical journals that a typical clinician, consumer, or

policy maker living in the US would reasonably search.

Methods and Findings:

We conducted a cohort study of trials supporting new drugs approved between 1998 and

2000, as described in FDA medical and statistical review documents and the FDA approved

drug label. We determined publication status and time from approval to full publication

in the medical literature at 2 and 5 y by searching PubMed and other databases through

01 August 2006. We then evaluated trial characteristics associated with publication. We

identified 909 trials supporting 90 approved drugs in the FDA reviews, of which

43% (394/909) were published. Among the subset of trials described in the

FDA-approved drug label and classified as “pivotal trials” for our

analysis, 76% (257/340) were published. In multivariable logistic regression

for all trials 5 y postapproval, likelihood of publication correlated with statistically

significant results (odds ratio [OR] 3.03, 95% confidence

interval [CI] 1.78–5.17); larger sample sizes (OR 1.33 per

2-fold increase in sample size, 95% CI 1.17–1.52); and pivotal

status (OR 5.31, 95% CI 3.30–8.55). In multivariable logistic

regression for only the pivotal trials 5 y postapproval, likelihood of publication

correlated with statistically significant results (OR 2.96, 95% CI

1. 24–7.06) and larger sample sizes (OR 1.47 per 2-fold increase in sample

size, 95% CI 1.15–1.88). Statistically significant results and

larger sample sizes were also predictive of publication at 2 y postapproval and in

multivariable Cox proportional models for all trials and the subset of pivotal

trials.

Conclusions:

Over half of all supporting trials for FDA-approved drugs remained unpublished ≥

5 y after approval. Pivotal trials and trials with statistically significant results and

larger sample sizes are more likely to be published. Selective reporting of trial

results exists for commonly marketed drugs. Our data provide a baseline for evaluating

publication bias as the new FDA Amendments Act comes into force mandating basic results

reporting of clinical trials.


Zdroje

1. [No author listed]

2006

Content and format of an application.

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Title 21, Pt. 314.50

2. [No author listed]

2006

Availability for public disclosure of data and information in an

application or abbreviated application.

CFR Title 21, Pt. 314.430

3. [No author listed]

2006

Freedom of Information Act.

Title 5 US Code 552(b)(4)

4. Simes

RJ

1986

Publication bias: the case for an international registry of clinical

trials.

J Clin Oncol

4

1529

1541

5. Chalmers

I

1990

Underreporting research is scientific misconduct.

JAMA

263

1405

1408

6. Nissen

SE

Wolski

K

2007

Effect of rosiglitazone on the risk of myocardial infarction and death from

cardiovascular causes.

N Engl J Med

356

2457

2471

7. New York State Court

(2

6

2004)

Spitzer v. GlaxoSmithKline PLC

New York Superior Court

No. 04/401707.

8. Topol

EJ

2004

Failing the public health—Rofecoxib, Merck, and the

FDA.

N Engl J Med

351

1707

1709

9. Mathews

A

Martinez

B

(01

11

2004)

E-mails suggest Merck knew Vioxx's dangers at early stage.

Wall Street Journal

1

10. Benjamin

DK

Jr.

Smith

PB

Murphy

MD

Roberts

R

Mathis

L

2006

Peer-reviewed publication of clinical trials completed for pediatric

exclusivity.

JAMA

296

1266

1273

11. Sim

I

Chan

AW

Gülmezoglu

AM

Evans

T

Pang

T

2006

Clinical Trial Registration: Transparency is the Watchword.

The Lancet

367

1631

1633

12. Laine

C

Horton

R

Deangelis

CD

Drazen

JM

Frizelle

FA

2007

Clinical trial registration: Looking back and moving ahead.

N Engl J Med

356

2734

2736

13. Committee on the Assessment of the US Drug Safety System

2007

The future of drug safety: Promoting and protecting the health of the

public.

In:

Baciu

A

Stratton

K

Burke

SP

Washington (D. C.)

National Academies Press

14. Hemminki

E

1980

Study of information submitted by drug companies to licensing

authorities.

BMJ

280

833

836

15. Melander

H

Ahlqvist-Rastad

J

Meijer

G

Beermann

B

2003

Evidence b(i)ased medicine—Selective reporting from studies

sponsored by pharmaceutical industry: review of studies in new drug

applications.

BMJ

326

1171

1173

16. Turner

EH

Matthews

AM

Linardatos

E

Tell

RA

Rosenthal

R

2008

Selective publication of antidepressant trials and its influence on

apparent efficacy.

N Engl J Med

358

252

260

17. MedAdNews

2005

Top 50 companies.

Available: http://www.pharmalive.com/magazines/medad/view.cfm?articleID=3799&f=3797.

Accessed 3 August 2007.

18. Moher

D

Schulz

KF

Altman

DG

2001

The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of

reports of parallel-group randomized trials.

Ann Intern Med

134

657

662

19. Khan

A

Khan

SR

Leventhal

RM

Krishnan

KR

Gorman

JM

2002

An application of the revised CONSORT standards to FDA summary reports of

recently approved antidepressants and antipsychotics.

Biol Psychiatry

52

62

67

20. [No authors listed]

2007

PhRMA clinical study results database.

Available: http://www.clinicalstudyresults.org/home/. Accessed 14 July

2008.

21. Dickersin

K

Chan

S

Chalmers

TC

Sacks

HS

Smith

H

Jr.

1987

Publication bias and clinical trials.

Control Clin Trials

8

343

353

22. Krzyzanowska

MK

Pintilie

M

Tannock

IF

2003

Factors associated with failure to publish large randomized trials

presented at an oncology meeting.

JAMA

290

495

501

23. Smith

R

2005

Medical journals are an extension of the marketing arm of pharmaceutical

companies.

PLoS Med

2

e138

doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0020138

24. Lee

KP

Boyd

EA

Holroyd-Leduc

JM

Bacchetti

P

Bero

LA

2006

Predictors of publication: Characteristics of submitted manuscripts

associated with acceptance at major biomedical journals.

Med J Aust

184

621

626

25. Olson

CM

Rennie

D

Cook

D

Dickersin

K

Flanagin

A

2002

Publication bias in editorial decision making.

JAMA

287

2825

2828

26. Moher

D

Jones

A

Lepage

L

2001

Use of the CONSORT statement and quality of reports of randomized trials: A

comparative before-and-after evaluation.

JAMA

285

1992

1995

27. Chan

AW

Hrobjartsson

A

Haahr

MT

Gotzsche

PC

Altman

DG

2004

Empirical evidence for selective reporting of outcomes in randomized

trials: comparison of protocols to published articles.

JAMA

291

2457

2465

28. Groves

T

2008

Mandatory disclosure of trial results for drugs and

devices.

BMJ

336

170

Štítky
Interné lekárstvo

Článok vyšiel v časopise

PLOS Medicine


2008 Číslo 9
Najčítanejšie tento týždeň
Najčítanejšie v tomto čísle
Kurzy

Zvýšte si kvalifikáciu online z pohodlia domova

Aktuální možnosti diagnostiky a léčby litiáz
nový kurz
Autori: MUDr. Tomáš Ürge, PhD.

Všetky kurzy
Prihlásenie
Zabudnuté heslo

Zadajte e-mailovú adresu, s ktorou ste vytvárali účet. Budú Vám na ňu zasielané informácie k nastaveniu nového hesla.

Prihlásenie

Nemáte účet?  Registrujte sa

#ADS_BOTTOM_SCRIPTS#