Literature DB >> 10568648

Problems in the design and reporting of trials of antifungal agents encountered during meta-analysis.

H K Johansen1, P C Gotzsche.   

Abstract

Meta-analyses may become biased if the reported data in the individual trials are biased and if overlap among trials cannot be identified. We describe the unanticipated problems we encountered in collecting data for a meta-analysis comparing a new antifungal agent, fluconazole, with amphotericin B in patients with cancer complicated by neutropenia. In 3 large trials that comprised 43% of the patients identified for the meta-analysis, results for amphotericin B were combined with results for nystatin in a "polyene" group. Because nystatin is recognized as an ineffective drug in these circumstances, this approach creates a bias in favor of fluconazole. Furthermore, 79% of the patients were randomized to receive oral amphotericin B, which is poorly absorbed and not an established treatment, in contrast to intravenous amphotericin B, which was administered in 4 of 5 placebo-controlled trials, or 86% of patients. It was unclear whether there was overlap among the "polyene" trials, and it is possible that results from single-center trials were included in multicenter trial reports. We were unable to obtain information to clarify these issues from the trial authors or the manufacturer of fluconazole. Two of 11 responding authors replied that the data were with the drug manufacturer and two indicated that they did not have access to their data because of change of affiliation. In the meta-analyses, fluconazole and amphotericin B (mostly given orally) had similar effects (13 trials), whereas nystatin was no better than placebo (3 trials). Since individual trials are rarely conclusive, investigators, institutions, and pharmaceutical companies should provide essential details about their work to ensure that meta-analyses can accurately reflect the studies conducted and that patients will realize maximum benefits from treatments. We recommend that investigators keep copies of their trial data to help facilitate accurate and unbiased meta-analyses.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10568648     DOI: 10.1001/jama.282.18.1752

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA        ISSN: 0098-7484            Impact factor:   56.272


  33 in total

1.  Early Toronto experience with new standards for industry-sponsored clinical research: a progress report.

Authors:  C David Naylor
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2002-02-19       Impact factor: 8.262

2.  Consensus and contention regarding redundant publications in clinical research: cross-sectional survey of editors and authors.

Authors:  V Yank; D Barnes
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2003-04       Impact factor: 2.903

Review 3.  Pharmaceutical industry sponsorship and research outcome and quality: systematic review.

Authors:  Joel Lexchin; Lisa A Bero; Benjamin Djulbegovic; Otavio Clark
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2003-05-31

4.  Randomized clinical trials: what gets published, and when?

Authors:  Laurence Hirsch
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2004-02-17       Impact factor: 8.262

5.  Identifying outcome reporting bias in randomised trials on PubMed: review of publications and survey of authors.

Authors:  An-Wen Chan; Douglas G Altman
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2005-01-28

6.  Fostering integrity in research: definitions, current knowledge, and future directions.

Authors:  Nicholas H Steneck
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 3.525

7.  Relationships between authorship contributions and authors' industry financial ties among oncology clinical trials.

Authors:  Susannah L Rose; Monika K Krzyzanowska; Steven Joffe
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2010-01-11       Impact factor: 44.544

8.  Adequacy of authors' replies to criticism raised in electronic letters to the editor: cohort study.

Authors:  Peter C Gøtzsche; Tony Delamothe; Fiona Godlee; Andreas Lundh
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2010-08-10

9.  Antifungal treatment for invasive Candida infections: a mixed treatment comparison meta-analysis.

Authors:  Edward J Mills; Dan Perri; Curtis Cooper; Jean B Nachega; Ping Wu; Imad Tleyjeh; Peter Phillips
Journal:  Ann Clin Microbiol Antimicrob       Date:  2009-06-26       Impact factor: 3.944

10.  Association of trial registration with the results and conclusions of published trials of new oncology drugs.

Authors:  Nicolas Rasmussen; Kirby Lee; Lisa Bero
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2009-12-16       Impact factor: 2.279

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.