Literature DB >> 28754815

Underreporting of Research Biopsies from Clinical Trials in Oncology.

Christine M Parseghian1, Kanwal Raghav1, Robert A Wolff1, Joe Ensor2, James Yao1, Lee M Ellis3, Alda L Tam4, Michael J Overman5.   

Abstract

Purpose: Research biopsies are frequently incorporated within clinical trials in oncology and are often a mandatory requirement for trial enrollment. However, limited information is available regarding the extent and completeness of research biopsy reporting.Experimental Design: We identified a cohort of therapeutic clinical trials where research biopsies were performed between January 2005 and October 2010 from an IR database at our institution. Clinical trial protocols were compared with the highest level of corresponding publication as a manuscript or registry report.
Results: A total of 866 research biopsies were performed across 46 clinical trials, with a median of 8 patients biopsied/trial and 19 biopsies collected/trial. After a median follow-up time of 4.3 years from trial completion, 36 of 46 trials (78%) reported trial results: published manuscripts (n = 35), or registry report (n = 1). A total of 635 conducted biopsies were reported in 18 of the 46 trials (39%). Six (33%) of these 18 trials underreported the number of biopsies performed. Of 33 trials with mandatory research biopsies, 13 (39%) trials reported on these biopsies. Biopsy complications occurred in 8 trials [n = 39 patients, 6 grade 3/4 adverse events (AE)] but only 1 trial reported these. Factors associated with biopsy reporting included a larger number of biopsies (P ≤ 0.001) and serial biopsies (P < 0.001). Twelve of 16 (75%) trials with >12 biopsies performed reported on these biopsies compared with only 20% (6/30) that performed ≤12 biopsies.Conclusions: Despite ethical obligations to report research biopsies, the majority (61%) of trials do not report results from research biopsies. Complications are rarely reported in these studies. Improved reporting of results and AEs from research biopsies is needed. Clin Cancer Res; 23(21); 6450-7. ©2017 AACR. ©2017 American Association for Cancer Research.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28754815      PMCID: PMC5668146          DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-17-1449

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Cancer Res        ISSN: 1078-0432            Impact factor:   12.531


  44 in total

1.  What makes clinical research ethical?

Authors:  E J Emanuel; D Wendler; C Grady
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2000 May 24-31       Impact factor: 56.272

2.  The fate of abstracts submitted to a cancer meeting: factors which influence presentation and subsequent publication.

Authors:  C De Bellefeuille; C A Morrison; I F Tannock
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  1992-03       Impact factor: 32.976

3.  Presentation and subsequent publication rates of phase I oncology clinical trials.

Authors:  Luis H Camacho; Jennifer Bacik; Alexander Cheung; David R Spriggs
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2005-10-01       Impact factor: 6.860

4.  Publication and non-publication of clinical trials: longitudinal study of applications submitted to a research ethics committee.

Authors:  Erik von Elm; Alexandra Röllin; Anette Blümle; Karin Huwiler; Mark Witschi; Matthias Egger
Journal:  Swiss Med Wkly       Date:  2008-04-05       Impact factor: 2.193

Review 5.  How important is publication bias? A synthesis of available data.

Authors:  K Dickersin
Journal:  AIDS Educ Prev       Date:  1997-02

6.  Time to publication among completed clinical trials.

Authors:  Joseph S Ross; Marian Mocanu; Julianna F Lampropulos; Tony Tse; Harlan M Krumholz
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2013-05-13       Impact factor: 21.873

7.  Prevalence, characteristics, and publication of discontinued randomized trials.

Authors:  Benjamin Kasenda; Erik von Elm; John You; Anette Blümle; Yuki Tomonaga; Ramon Saccilotto; Alain Amstutz; Theresa Bengough; Joerg J Meerpohl; Mihaela Stegert; Kari A O Tikkinen; Ignacio Neumann; Alonso Carrasco-Labra; Markus Faulhaber; Sohail M Mulla; Dominik Mertz; Elie A Akl; Dirk Bassler; Jason W Busse; Ignacio Ferreira-González; Francois Lamontagne; Alain Nordmann; Viktoria Gloy; Heike Raatz; Lorenzo Moja; Rachel Rosenthal; Shanil Ebrahim; Stefan Schandelmaier; Sun Xin; Per O Vandvik; Bradley C Johnston; Martin A Walter; Bernard Burnand; Matthias Schwenkglenks; Lars G Hemkens; Heiner C Bucher; Gordon H Guyatt; Matthias Briel
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2014-03-12       Impact factor: 56.272

8.  Use of research biopsies in clinical trials: are risks and benefits adequately discussed?

Authors:  Michael J Overman; Janhavi Modak; Scott Kopetz; Ravi Murthy; James C Yao; Marshall E Hicks; James L Abbruzzese; Alda L Tam
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2012-11-05       Impact factor: 44.544

9.  Assessment of publication bias, selection bias, and unavailable data in meta-analyses using individual participant data: a database survey.

Authors:  Ikhlaaq Ahmed; Alexander J Sutton; Richard D Riley
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2012-01-03

10.  Reporting practices of pharmacodynamic studies involving invasive research procedures in cancer trials.

Authors:  G A Freeman; J Kimmelman; J Dancey; J G Monzon
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2013-07-25       Impact factor: 7.640

View more
  3 in total

1.  Assessment of Reported Trial Characteristics, Rate of Publication, and Inclusion of Mandatory Biopsies of Research Biopsies in Clinical Trials in Oncology.

Authors:  Christine M Parseghian; Alda L Tam; James Yao; Joe Ensor; Lee M Ellis; Kanwal Raghav; Michael J Overman
Journal:  JAMA Oncol       Date:  2019-03-01       Impact factor: 31.777

2.  Analyses of the Rationale and Implementation of Research Biopsies in Oncology Clinical Trials at a Tertiary Cancer Center.

Authors:  Nathalie Olympios; Laetitia Collet; Marianne Paesmans; Christiane Jungels; Nuria Kotecki; Ahmad Awada; Philippe Aftimos
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2021-08-04

3.  Variability in biopsy quality informs translational research applications in hepatocellular carcinoma.

Authors:  Kelley Weinfurtner; Joshua Cho; Daniel Ackerman; James X Chen; Abashai Woodard; Wuyan Li; David Ostrowski; Michael C Soulen; Mandeep Dagli; Susan Shamimi-Noori; Jeffrey Mondschein; Deepak Sudheendra; S William Stavropoulos; Shilpa Reddy; Jonas Redmond; Tamim Khaddash; Darshana Jhala; Evan S Siegelman; Emma E Furth; Stephen J Hunt; Gregory J Nadolski; David E Kaplan; Terence P F Gade
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-11-23       Impact factor: 4.996

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.