Discontinuation and non-publication of surgical randomised controlled trials: observational study

Stephen J Chapman, Bryony Shelton, Humza Mahmood, J Edward Fitzgerald, Ewen M Harrison, Aneel Bhangu, Stephen J Chapman, Bryony Shelton, Humza Mahmood, J Edward Fitzgerald, Ewen M Harrison, Aneel Bhangu

Abstract

Objective: To determine the rate of early discontinuation and non-publication of randomised controlled trials involving patients undergoing surgery.

Design: Cross sectional observational study of registered and published trials.

Setting: Randomised controlled trials of interventions in patients undergoing a surgical procedure.

Data sources: The ClinicalTrials.gov database was searched for interventional trials registered between January 2008 and December 2009 using the keyword "surgery". Recruitment status was extracted from the ClinicalTrials.gov database. A systematic search for studies published in peer reviewed journals was performed; if they were not found, results posted on the ClinicalTrials.gov results database were sought. Email queries were sent to trial investigators of discontinued and unpublished completed trials if no reason for the respective status was disclosed.

Main outcome measures: Trial discontinuation before completion and non-publication after completion. Logistic regression was used to determine the effect of funding source on publication status, with adjustment for intervention type and trial size.

Results: Of 818 registered trials found using the keyword "surgery", 395 met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 21% (81/395) were discontinued early, most commonly owing to poor recruitment (44%, 36/81). The remaining 314 (79%) trials proceeded to completion, with a publication rate of 66% (208/314) at a median time of 4.9 (interquartile range 4.0-6.0) years from study completion to publication search. A further 6% (20/314) of studies presented results on ClinicalTrials.gov without a corresponding peer reviewed publication. Industry funding did not affect the rate of discontinuation (adjusted odds ratio 0.91, 95% confidence interval 0.54 to 1.55) but was associated with a lower odds of publication for completed trials (0.43, 0.26 to 0.72). Investigators' email addresses for trials with an uncertain fate were identified for 71.4% (10/14) of discontinued trials and 83% (101/122) of unpublished studies. Only 43% (6/14) and 20% (25/122) replies were received. Email responses for completed trials indicated 11 trials in press, five published studies (four in non-indexed peer reviewed journals), and nine trials remaining unpublished.

Conclusions: One in five surgical randomised controlled trials are discontinued early, one in three completed trials remain unpublished, and investigators of unpublished studies are frequently not contactable. This represents a waste of research resources and raises ethical concerns regarding hidden clinical data and futile participation by patients with its attendant risks. To promote future efficiency and transparency, changes are proposed to research governance frameworks to overcome these concerns.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form at www.icmje.org/coi_disclosure.pdf (available on request from the corresponding author) and declare: no support from any organisation for the submitted work; no financial relationships with any organisations that might have an interest in the submitted work in the previous three years; no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work.

© Chapman et al 2014.

Figures

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/4793819/bin/chas020617.f1_default.jpg
Fig 1 Inclusion and exclusion criteria of clinical trials
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/4793819/bin/chas020617.f2_default.jpg
Fig 2 Discontinued trials: authors’ email response
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/4793819/bin/chas020617.f3_default.jpg
Fig 3 Completed trials: identified publications and authors’ email response

References

    1. Chan AW, Song F, Vickers A, Jefferson T, Dickersin K, Gøtzsche PC, et al. Increasing value and reducing waste: addressing inaccessible research. Lancet 2014;383:257-66.
    1. Jones CW, Handler L, Crowell KE, Keil LG, Weaver MA, Platts-Mills TF. Non-publication of large randomized clinical trials: cross sectional analysis. BMJ 2013;347:f6104.
    1. Kasenda B, von Elm E, You J, Blümle A, Tomoanga Y, Saccilotto R, et al. Prevalence, characteristics, and publication of discontinued randomized trials. JAMA 2014;311:1045-51.
    1. Manzoli L, Flacco ME, D’Addario M, Capasso L, De Vito C, Marzuillo C, et al. Non-publication and delayed publication of randomized trials on vaccines: survey. BMJ 2014;348:g3058.
    1. Garas G, Ibrahim A, Ashrafian H, Ahmed K, Patel V, Okabayashi K, et al. Evidence-based surgery: barriers, solutions, and the role of evidence synthesis. World J Surg 2012;36:1723-31.
    1. Royal College of Surgeons of England. From innovation to adoption: successfully spreading surgical innovation. London: RCSENG Communications, 2014.
    1. Killeen S, Sourallous P, Hunter IA, Hartley JE, Grady HL. Registration rates, adequacy of registration, and a comparison of registered and published primary outcomes in randomized controlled trials published in surgery journals. Ann Surg 2014;259:193-6.
    1. DeAngelis CD, Drazen JM, Frizelle FA, Haug C, Hoey J, Horton R, et al. Clinical trial registration: a statement from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. JAMA 2004;292:1363-4.
    1. Huser V, Cimino JJ. Linking and PubMed to track results of interventional human clinical trials. PLoS One 2013;8:e68409.
    1. US National Institutes of Health. Trends, charts and maps. 2014. .
    1. National Institutes of Health. Glossary of common site terms. 2014. .
    1. Gray R, Sullivan M, Altman DG, Gordon-Weeks AN. Adherence of trials of operative intervention to the CONSORT statement extension for non-pharmacological treatments: a comparative before and after study. Ann R Coll Surg Eng 2012;94:388-94.
    1. Rosenthal R, Kasendra B, Dell-Kuster S, von Elm E, You J, Blümle A, et al. Completion and publication rates of randomized controlled trials in surgery: an empirical study. Ann Surg 2014. (in print).
    1. Ross JS, Mulvey GK, Hines EM, Nissen SE, Krumholz HM. Trial publication after registration in : a cross-sectional analysis. PLoS Med 2009;6:e1000144.
    1. Ross JS, Tse T, Zarin DA, Xu H, Zhou L, Jrumholz HM, et al. Publication of NIH funded trials registered in : cross sectional analysis. BMJ 2012;344:d7292.
    1. Von Elm E, Rollin A, Blümle A, Huwiler K, Egger M. Publication and non-publication of clinical trials: longitudinal study of applications submitted to a research ethics committee. Swiss Med Wkly 2008;138:197-203.
    1. Blümle A, Meerpohl JJ, Schumacher M, von Elm E. Fate of clinical research studies after ethical approval—follow-up of study protocols until publication. PLoS One 2014;9:e87184.
    1. Lee K, Bacchetti P, Sim I. Publication of clinical trials supporting successful new drug applications: a literature analysis. PLoS Med 2008;5:e191.
    1. Bhangu A, Kolias AG, Pinkney T, Hall NJ, Fitzgerald JE. Surgical research collaboratives in the UK. Lancet 2013;382:1091-2.
    1. Lehman R, Loder E. Missing clinical trial data. BMJ 2012;344:d8158.
    1. Chapman S, Bhangu A. Ban on publishing industry funded research could harm surgical innovation. BMJ 2014;348:g1291.
    1. Graf C, Battisti WP, Bridges D, Bruce-Winkler V, Conaty JM, Ellison JM, et al. Good publication practice for communicating company sponsored medical research: the GPP2 guidelines. BMJ 2009;339:b4330.
    1. World Medical Association. World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. JAMA 2013;310:2191-4.

Source: PubMed

3
Se inscrever