Literature DB >> 28747301

Pharmaceutical companies' policies on access to trial data, results, and methods: audit study.

Ben Goldacre1, Síle Lane2, Kamal R Mahtani3, Carl Heneghan3, Igho Onakpoya3, Ian Bushfield2, Liam Smeeth4.   

Abstract

Objectives To identify the policies of major pharmaceutical companies on transparency of trials, to extract structured data detailing each companies' commitments, and to assess concordance with ethical and professional guidance.Design Structured audit.Setting Pharmaceutical companies, worldwide.Participants 42 pharmaceutical companies.Main outcome measures Companies' commitments on sharing summary results, clinical study reports (CSRs), individual patient data (IPD), and trial registration, for prospective and retrospective trials.Results Policies were highly variable. Of 23 companies eligible from the top 25 companies by revenue, 21 (91%) committed to register all trials and 22 (96%) committed to share summary results; however, policies commonly lacked timelines for disclosure, and trials on unlicensed medicines and off-label uses were only included in six (26%). 17 companies (74%) committed to share the summary results of past trials. The median start date for this commitment was 2005. 22 companies (96%) had a policy on sharing CSRs, mostly on request: two committed to share only synopses and only two policies included unlicensed treatments. 22 companies (96%) had a policy to share IPD; 14 included phase IV trials (one included trials on unlicensed medicines and off-label uses). Policies in the exploratory group of smaller companies made fewer transparency commitments. Two companies fell short of industry body commitments on registration, three on summary results. Examples of contradictory and ambiguous language were documented and summarised by theme. 23/42 companies (55%) responded to feedback; 7/1806 scored policy elements were revised in light of feedback from companies (0.4%). Several companies committed to changing policy; some made changes immediately.Conclusions The commitments made by companies to transparency of trials were highly variable. Other than journal submission for all trials within 12 months, all elements of best practice were met by at least one company, showing that these commitments are realistic targets. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28747301     DOI: 10.1136/bmj.j3334

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMJ        ISSN: 0959-8138


  18 in total

Review 1.  Standards for design and measurement would make clinical research reproducible and usable.

Authors:  Kay Dickersin; Evan Mayo-Wilson
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2018-03-13       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  Availability and Use of Shared Data From Cardiometabolic Clinical Trials.

Authors:  Muthiah Vaduganathan; Amulya Nagarur; Arman Qamar; Ravi B Patel; Ann Marie Navar; Eric D Peterson; Deepak L Bhatt; Gregg C Fonarow; Clyde W Yancy; Javed Butler
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2017-11-13       Impact factor: 29.690

3.  Noncommercial Funders' Policies on Trial Registration, Access to Summary Results, and Individual Patient Data Availability.

Authors:  Nicholas J DeVito; Lisa French; Ben Goldacre
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2018-04-24       Impact factor: 56.272

Review 4.  Using digital health to enable ethical health research in conflict and other humanitarian settings.

Authors:  Eric D Perakslis
Journal:  Confl Health       Date:  2018-05-14       Impact factor: 2.723

5.  A review of data sharing statements in observational studies published in the BMJ: A cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Laura McDonald; Anna Schultze; Alex Simpson; Sophie Graham; Radek Wasiak; Sreeram V Ramagopalan
Journal:  F1000Res       Date:  2017-09-19

6.  Data sharing from pharmaceutical industry sponsored clinical studies: audit of data availability.

Authors:  Ashley M Hopkins; Andrew Rowland; Michael J Sorich
Journal:  BMC Med       Date:  2018-09-28       Impact factor: 8.775

7.  Clinical trial transparency and data sharing among biopharmaceutical companies and the role of company size, location and product type: a cross-sectional descriptive analysis.

Authors:  Sydney Axson; Michelle M Mello; Deborah Lincow; Catherine Yang; Cary Gross; Joseph S Ross; Jennifer Miller
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2021-07-19       Impact factor: 2.692

8.  Characteristics and publication fate of unregistered and retrospectively registered clinical trials submitted to The BMJ over 4 years.

Authors:  Elizabeth Loder; Stephen Loder; Sophie Cook
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2018-02-16       Impact factor: 2.692

9.  Randomly auditing research labs could be an affordable way to improve research quality: A simulation study.

Authors:  Adrian G Barnett; Pauline Zardo; Nicholas Graves
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-04-12       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Partially systematic thoughts on the history of systematic reviews.

Authors:  Mike Clarke
Journal:  Syst Rev       Date:  2018-10-27
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.