Literature DB >> 22291502

Reporting of results of interventional studies by the information service of the National Institutes of Health.

Tatyana Shamliyan1.   

Abstract

The Food and Drug Administration Amendments Act of 2007 mandated that sponsors of applicable studies must provide results within one year of study completion. We aimed to analyze the factors associated with reporting of results from interventional studies registered on ClinicalTrials.gov. On May 20, 2010, we retrieved 20 available fields from 57,233 closed studies on the website and identified 31,161 interventional studies that were required to post results. We compared the proportion of studies with results versus studies without results by age, gender, and disease status of participants, by interventions, sponsors, phase of clinical trials, and completion dates. The results of studies were reported for 4.7% of applicable studies, 8% of industry-sponsored studies, 7.5% of Phase II and 6.5% of Phase IV clinical trials, 4.9% of drug studies, and 0% of genetic studies. Withdrawn (n = 486) and suspended (n = 414) interventions did not provide results. The percentage of studies with results varied from 0% to 21% among different sponsors. The first studies with results were completed in 1992. The proportion of studies with results increased over time. Completion dates were not available for 7446 studies. The database does not have fields available to facilitate routine analysis of the rate of compliance with federal law for posting results. The analysis of accuracy of the protocols in relation to the results and publications is not possible without time-consuming evaluation of individual postings and individual publications.

Entities:  

Keywords:  access to information; clinical trials; disclosure; registries; research standards

Year:  2010        PMID: 22291502      PMCID: PMC3262359          DOI: 10.2147/CPAA.S12398

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Pharmacol        ISSN: 1179-1438


Introduction

Transparency in designing, conducting, and reporting of human experiments and observational studies is essential to guarantee the integrity of clinical research.1 Registration of clinical trials with information about study sponsors and protocols makes clinical research more transparent. In 2000, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) requested that clinical trials assessing pharmacologic treatments for serious or life-threatening diseases be registered in the ClinicalTrials.gov online database. This website was developed by the National Library of Medicine as an information service for the NIH and the US Department of Health and Human Services.2 However, at that time, NIH policy did not require mandatory registration of all human studies. In 2005, the World Association of Medical Editors started to require mandatory registration of all clinical studies as a condition of publication.3 Sponsors must now provide the World Health Organization (WHO) with a minimum dataset of information, including details of study design, recruitment activities, ethics review of research, target sample size, conditions of eligibility for subjects to participate in the study, and primary and secondary outcomes.4 Stakeholders can find detailed information about study protocols on ClinicalTrials.gov, but study results are not yet consistently available online. Selective publication of positive results and outcomes5–7 led to further scrutiny and called for public disclosure of study results. The Food and Drug Administration Amendments Act (FDAAA) of 2007 mandated that sponsors of applicable studies must provide study flow, baseline subject characteristics, and outcomes after active and control interventions within one year of study completion.8 The FDAAA regulations defined the following clinical trials as needing to adhere to the requirements: Phase II–IV interventional studies, studies involving any drugs, biological products, or medical devices regulated by the FDA, studies having at least one site in the US or which are conducted under an investigational new drug application or investigational device exemption; and studies initiated or ongoing as of September 27, 2007, or later.9–12 Results can be posted within three years of completion of the study for trials investigating off-label use of previously approved drugs. Registration of clinical trials on ClinicalTrials.gov improved the transparency of clinical research tremendously. 13–15 Stakeholders can find the WHO minimum dataset for the design of 92,385 studies.16 Harvard University has recognized the achievement of this website with their Innovations in American Government Award.17 The degree of sponsor compliance with federal law in providing results of studies on ClinicalTrials.gov has not been examined as yet. We aimed to examine the completeness of the posted study designs and factors associated with reporting study results.

Methods

We retrieved all closed studies from ClinicalTrials.gov as of May 20, 2010. We retrieved all 20 available fields, including the ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, age group, gender, disease status of the eligible subjects, and examined interventions, recruitment status, study sponsors, study type and design, phase of clinical trials, start and completion dates, and posting of study results. Field locations were as described online at http://prsinfo.clinicaltrials.gov/definitions.html. We used the exact data provided by the sponsors. We further categorized interventions as behavioral, biological, device, dietary supplements, disease management, drug, education, genetic, procedural, and exercise. We also redefined conditions into larger diagnostic categories with the first disease stated. For example, when the condition was defined as “arthralgia, pain assessment”, we analyzed it under the category of “arthralgia”. The available data do not have a single field to define the studies that are applicable to the US Public Law 110-85 (FDAAA), Title VIII, Section 801 for mandatory reporting of results. Therefore, we defined closed not-recruiting interventional trials, excluding Phase 0–I trials, as applicable to comply with FDAAA regulations. We calculated descriptive frequency statistics without formal hypothesis testing because we did not sample the data but rather analyzed all closed studies available. We then compared the proportions of studies having results with the proportions of studies without results in categories of age, gender, disease status, interventions, study sponsorship, types, and completion dates. All calculations were performed with frequency procedure using SAS 9.1 software (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC).

Results

We retrieved 57,299 records but eliminated 66 records with misplaced fields, leaving a total of 57,233 records for analysis. We analyzed the completeness of the minimum dataset and found that 393 studies did not provide the gender for eligible subjects, 287 studies did not specify the type of study, and 5908 did not specify intervention or exposure (Table 1). We noticed a marked inconsistency in the classification and reporting of patient conditions, which made statistical analysis difficult. For example, “non small cell lung cancer” was reported variously as “non-small cell lung cancer”, “non small cell lung carcinoma”, or “NSCLC”. More than 50% of the studies included adult subjects, and 85% of all studies recruited both genders. Children and seniors were included in a very small proportion of studies. More than 60% of closed studies were completed, and more than 65% of closed studies examined the effects of pharmacologic treatments. A total of 39% of all studies were sponsored by industry. Most of the studies (97%) did not have their results posted on the website.
Table 1

Distribution of the studies closed in www.clinicaltrials.gov on 20 May 2010

CategoryFrequencyPercentage
Age
Adult10,25417.92
Adult/senior32,67857.1
Child34285.99
Child/adult25444.44
Child/adult/senior815814.25
Senior1710.3
GenderFrequency missing (n = 393)
Both48,22484.84
Female54089.51
Male32085.64
Funding sources
Industry22,28838.94
Industry with other funding sources48358.45
Recruitment
Active, not recruiting13,75124.03
Approved for marketing160.03
Completed36,99264.63
Enrolling by invitation13302.32
No longer available240.04
Suspended5871.03
Temporarily not available70.01
Terminated35546.21
Withdrawn6851.2
Withheld2870.5
Study typesFrequency missing (n = 287)
Expanded access470.08
Interventional48,85985.8
Observational804014.12
Recruitment
Active, not recruiting13,75124.03
Approved for marketing160.03
Completed36,99264.63
Enrolling by invitation13302.32
No longer available240.04
Suspended5871.03
Temporarily not available70.01
Terminated35546.21
Withdrawn6851.2
Withheld2870.5
Study results
Has results17933.13
No results available55,44096.87
PhasesFrequency missing (n = 16,589)
Phase 01760.43
Phase I716317.62
Phase II12,77531.43
Phase II10,65726.22
Phase II–II11822.91
Phase IV648815.96
Phase I–II22035.42
InterventionsFrequency missing (n = 5908)
Behavioral32976.42
Biological39477.69
Device33036.44
Diet1120.22
Dietary supplement9121.78
Disease management80.02
Drug33,60565.47
Education660.13
Genetic2500.49
Other18153.54
Procedure36887.19
Radiation2070.4
Exercise1150.22
Of 31,161 applicable closed interventional studies, 4.5% had results available. Proportions of studies with results contained similar age and gender groups (Table 2). Studies with children as subjects tended to report results more frequently. Industry-sponsored studies reported results more often (8.1%) than nonindustry-funded studies (Table 3). Phase III and IV clinical trials reported results more often (total 14%) compared with Phase II trials (3%, Table 3). Suspended interventions (n = 414) and withdrawn interventions (n = 486) did not provide results or reasons for the cause of suspension or withdrawal (Table 3). The first studies containing results (n = 3) were sponsored by Merck and added to the database in 2009. These three studies are listed as NCT00882440, NCT00886600, and NCT00887250, and were completed in 1992. Among the applicable closed interventional studies, 7446 did not provide a completion date. The proportion of the studies with results increased over time (see Figure 1).
Table 2

Age and gender distribution of the interventional, active, not recruiting studies applicable to reporting the results (Phase 0–I excluded)

AgeGenderHas resultsNo results availablenPercentage with results
AdultBoth151380739583.82
Female398769154.26
Male64104161.44
Total196509352893.71
Frequency missing (n = 10)
Adult/seniorBoth78715,71916,5064.77
Female46134813943.30
Male287087363.80
Total86117,77518,6364.62
Frequency missing (n = 16)
ChildBoth157195121087.45
Female6344015.00
Male031310.00
Total163201621797.48
Child/adultBoth30106610962.74
Female101511616.21
Male123244.17
Total41124012813.20
Frequency missing (n = 1)
Child/adult/seniorBoth113298731003.65
Female123853973.02
Male41191233.25
Total129349136203.56
Frequency missing (n = 35)
SeniorBoth482864.65
Female0880.00
Male000
Total490944.26
Table 3

Funding distribution, phases, and completion status of the interventional, active, not recruiting studies applicable to reporting of results (Phase 0–I excluded)

Funding sourceHas resultsNo results availablenPercentage with results
Total139429,76731,1614.47
Industry112612,78913,9158.09
Industry with other sources72264427162.65
National Institutes of Health23221422371.03
Other/National Institutes of Health19136713861.37
Other/unknown158408551.75
Network/National Institutes of Health26656670.30
US Federal54444491.11
National Institutes of Health/other03663660.00
Phases
Total126823,26824,5365.17
Phase I–II26144414701.77
Phase II283878890713.12
Phase II–II197988172.33
Phase II613755581687.50
Phase IV327468350106.53
Frequency missing (n = 6625)
Completion status
Completed124325,39026,6334.67
Enrolling by invitation07687680.00
Suspended04144140.00
Terminated151270928605.28
Total139429,76731,1614.47
Withdrawn04864860.00
Figure 1

Time trend in percentage of interventional studies with results among all applicable closed studies.

Among the applicable 31,161 closed interventional studies, the studies of hypertension and influenza reported results more often (7.5% and 9.7%, respectively, Table 4). The most commonly reported examined disease states included breast cancer, schizophrenia, and pain. Most of the closed studies of these conditions did not report the results (Table 4). The proportion of studies with results varied substantially between different sponsors (Table 5). Several pharmaceutical firms, including GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, Merck, and Eli Lilly and Company, sponsored more than 50 studies each and provided the results for more than 10% of the total sponsored studies. Two pharmaceutical firms, ie, Alcon Research and Eli Lilly and Company, provided results for more than 20% of applicable sponsored studies. Several sponsors did not provide results for funded studies. For instance, the National Cancer Institute sponsored 208 closed interventions without results and Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center sponsored 190 closed interventions without results. Genetic treatments were examined in 48 closed studies. None of the genetic studies provided results (Table 6). The studies of several drug, including zidovudine, risperidone, and vildagliptin, did not report their results.
Table 4

Distribution of conditions of subjects in closed interventional, active, not recruiting studies applicable to reporting of results (Phase 0–I excluded)

ConditionsHas resultsNo results availablenPercentage with results
Total139429,76331,1574.47
Largest number with results
Diabetes99137814776.70
Hypertension354354707.45
Human immunodeficiency virus33116511982.75
Asthma305135435.52
Largest number closed studies
Breast cancer164905063.16
Schizophrenia184314494.01
Pain133423553.66
Obesity43513551.13
Leukemia43193231.24
Lymphoma23203220.62
Prostate cancer123013133.83
Osteoarthritis132452585.04
Influenza252322579.73
Cardiovascular disease32332361.27
Colorectal cancer22332350.85
Rheumatoid arthritis122192315.19
Major depression132062195.94
Lung cancer32162191.37
Depression32102131.41
Anemia121922045.88
Frequency missing (n = 4)
Table 5

Sponsors of the closed interventional, active, not recruiting studies applicable to reporting of results (Phase 0–I excluded)

SponsorsHas resultsNo results availablenPercentage with results
Total139429,76731,1614.47
Largest number with the results
GlaxoSmithKline11572884313.64
Pfizer9960470314.08
Merck9341250518.42
Eli Lilly and Company7628335921.17
Schering-Plough4322026316.35
Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals3718121816.97
Sanofi-aventis365906265.75
Alcon Research3513116621.08
UCB Inc.3313516819.64
Abbott2516318813.30
Bayer2320622910.04
Wyeth232412648.71
Takeda Global Research and Development Center Inc.218510619.81
Results number of closed applicable studies
Novartis Pharmaceuticals56946990.72
AstraZeneca174224393.87
National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases83863942.03
National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute63373431.75
Department of Veterans Affairs13243250.31
National Institute of Mental Health42392431.65
National Cancer Institute02082080.00
Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center/National Cancer Institute01901900.00
Hoffmann-La Roche41831872.14
Bristol-Myers-Squibb171681859.19
Johnson and Johnson Pharmaceutical Research and Development, LLC71631704.12
Novo Nordisk121551677.19
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases21591611.24
Amgen31501531.96
National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine21321341.49
Astellas Pharma Inc11211220.82
North Central Cancer Treatment Group/National Cancer Institute01141140.00
National Institute on Drug Abuse11091100.91
Table 6

Treatments that were examined in the closed interventional, active, not recruiting studies applicable to reporting of results (Phase 0–I excluded)

InterventionsHas resultsNo results availablenPercentage with results
Total (n = 4 missing)139429,76331,1574.47
Biological165174019058.66
Device84191419984.20
Drug104520,342213874.89
Genetic048480.00
Interventions tested in largest number of studies
Topiramate066660.00
Epoetin-alfa071710.00
Risperidone064640.00
Buprenorphine039390.00
Zidovudine033330.00
Levetiracetam130313.23
Aripiprazole128293.45
Bortezomib028280.00
Etanercept127283.57
Vildagliptin028280.00
Thalidomide025250.00
Atorvastatin123244.17
Esomeprazole123244.17
Levitra/placebo123244.17
Pregabalin3202313.04
Procedure: acupuncture023230.00
Rituximab122234.35
Nitrous oxide021210.00
Arsenic trioxide020200.00
Interventions with largest number of reported results
Rotigotine971656.25
Dexlansoprazole MR/dexlansoprazole MR/placebo606100.00
Pemetrexed581338.46
Pemetrexed/cisplatin54955.56
Biological: Engerix™-B404100.00
Telavancin/vancomycin404100.00
Atomoxetine3151816.67
Duloxetine/placebo371030.00

Abbreviation: MR, modified release.

Of 31,161 applicable closed interventional studies, 2860 were terminated and 5.3% of 2860 reported results (Table 7). In terminated studies, the most common diseases involved were diabetes and human immunodeficiency virus. Of the terminated studies in prostate cancer, anemia, asthma, and rheumatoid arthritis, more than 10% reported results. The terminated studies of subjects with lymphoma, pain, obesity, heart failure, and colorectal cancer did not provide results. The majority of interventions that were suspended or withdrawn examined the effects of drugs (Table 8). Breast cancer and prostate cancer were among the most common conditions for trials which were suspended or had interventions withdrawn.
Table 7

Terminated interventional, active, not recruiting studies applicable to reporting of results (Phase 0–I excluded) by type of condition (shown for ≥20 total studies)

ConditionsWith resultsNo resultsnPercentage with results
Total151270928605.28
Diabetes131351488.78
Human immunodeficiency virus594995.05
Breast cancer252543.70
Lymphoma053530.00
Schizophrenia241434.65
Prostate cancer5354012.50
Anemia5303514.29
Pain033330.00
Leukemia329329.38
Non small cell lung cancer7475412.96
Obesity031310.00
Asthma4242814.29
Heart failure027270.00
Colorectal cancer026260.00
Osteoarthritis122234.35
Myeloma022220.00
Ovarian cancer120214.76
Rheumatoid arthritis4172119.05
Crohn’s disease119205.00
Hypertension119205.00
Table 8

Patient conditions in withdrawn and suspended interventions applicable to reporting of results by type of treatment (shown if ≥10 interventions). The results are not available for all studies

Withdrawn interventionsBiologicalDeviceDrugProcedureRadiationTotal
Total2047341452486
Breast cancer30120016
Diabetes1092012
Asthma1172011
Human immunodeficiency virus4050011
Suspended interventions
Total5043254411414
Prostate cancer1081011
Brain and central nervous system tumors2080010
Human immunodeficiency virus1081010
Leukemia3061010
Melanoma6040010

Discussion

We found that a statistical analysis of compliance with mandatory reporting of results was difficult to perform. Missing or inconsistently reported study details, including patient diseases, study completion dates, and reported interventions may lead to wrong conclusions about a sponsor’s compliance with federal law regarding study registration and reporting of outcomes. We could not identify a single well-defined field that has applicability status of individual studies to provide results. One variable provides information about the posting of the results. The changes in protocols and deviations from the planned presentation of the primary outcomes and safety outcomes were not easy to analyze without time-consuming evaluation of each study. Reporting of studies completed before September 2007 was available in a small proportion of the interventions, when the sponsors decided to comply. Both clinicians and the general public need complete and accurate information about study protocols and results.9 Stakeholders should be able to find a clear description of interventions, including prior FDA approvals, off-label evaluations, investigational new drug applications and numbers, and investigational device exemptions, as well as the applicability of reported results.18–20 Critical appraisal of the protocols and reported results on a regular basis by clinical epidemiologists may be worthwhile to ensure integrity of the clinical research reported on ClinicalTrials.gov. Clinicians and patients need independent access to protocols and market approval status of the tested interventions. Finally, our analysis found that none of the suspended or withdrawn studies reported either the baseline characteristics of enrolled subjects or the exact reasons for terminating the study. Posting the results of a study should be mandatory for all trials, regardless of prior FDA approval.9,11 Our study had several limitations. We defined the applicability of studies without evaluation of the market status of individual studies. We did not analyze deviations from the protocols when reporting the results. We did not analyze whether the sponsors posted the study results in a timely manner according to the expected date. Future research should analyze time intervals between completion of the study, posting of results, and publication of the results in peer-reviewed journals. We conclude that compliance with the requirements to post results of closed studies is low for both industry- and nonindustry-sponsored studies. The need for studies to report the results should be identified in the database during the registration of the studies.
  15 in total

1.  Publication and related bias in meta-analysis: power of statistical tests and prevalence in the literature.

Authors:  J A Sterne; D Gavaghan; M Egger
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 6.437

2.  Registering results from clinical trials.

Authors:  An-Wen Chan; Andreas Laupacis; David Moher
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2010-06-02       Impact factor: 56.272

3.  Registering results from clinical trials.

Authors:  Julien Mancini; Claire Julian Reynier
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2010-06-02       Impact factor: 56.272

4.  National Institutes of Health's ClinicalTrials.gov Web site wins prestigious award.

Authors: 
Journal:  J Investig Med       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 2.895

5.  Registering a clinical trial in ClinicalTrials.gov.

Authors:  Deborah A Zarin; Alla Keselman
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2007-02-15       Impact factor: 9.410

6.  Reporting clinical trial results.

Authors:  Bruce L Pihlstrom
Journal:  J Am Dent Assoc       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 3.634

7.  Trial registration and results disclosure: impact of US legislation on sponsors, investigators, and medical journal editors.

Authors:  Laurence Hirsch
Journal:  Curr Med Res Opin       Date:  2008-05-06       Impact factor: 2.580

8.  Registering clinical trial results: the next step.

Authors:  James Dabney Miller
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2010-02-24       Impact factor: 56.272

9.  Compliance of clinical trial registries with the World Health Organization minimum data set: a survey.

Authors:  Lorenzo P Moja; Ivan Moschetti; Munira Nurbhai; Anna Compagnoni; Alessandro Liberati; Jeremy M Grimshaw; An-Wen Chan; Kay Dickersin; Karmela Krleza-Jeric; David Moher; Ida Sim; Jimmy Volmink
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2009-07-22       Impact factor: 2.279

Review 10.  Systematic review of the empirical evidence of study publication bias and outcome reporting bias.

Authors:  Kerry Dwan; Douglas G Altman; Juan A Arnaiz; Jill Bloom; An-Wen Chan; Eugenia Cronin; Evelyne Decullier; Philippa J Easterbrook; Erik Von Elm; Carrol Gamble; Davina Ghersi; John P A Ioannidis; John Simes; Paula R Williamson
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2008-08-28       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  2 in total

1.  Timing and completeness of trial results posted at ClinicalTrials.gov and published in journals.

Authors:  Carolina Riveros; Agnes Dechartres; Elodie Perrodeau; Romana Haneef; Isabelle Boutron; Philippe Ravaud
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2013-12-03       Impact factor: 11.069

2.  Pediatric clinical trials.

Authors:  Sandeep B Bavdekar
Journal:  Perspect Clin Res       Date:  2013-01
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.