|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
abstract:
Premature trial discontinuation often not accurately reflected in registries: comparison of registry records with publications
Background
One quarter of
randomized clinical trials (RCTs) are prematurely discontinued and
frequently remain unpublished. Trial registries can document whether a
trial is ongoing, suspended, discontinued, or completed and therefore
represent an important source for trial status information. The accuracy
of this information is unclear.
Objective
To
examine the accuracy of completion status and reasons for
discontinuation documented in trial registries as compared to
corresponding publications of discontinued RCTs (reference standard),
and to investigate potential predictors for accurate trial status
information in registries.
Methods
We
conducted a cross-sectional study comparing information provided in
publications (reference standard) to corresponding registry entries.
First, we reviewed publications of RCTs providing information on both
discontinuation and registration. We identified eligible RCT
publications through systematic searches of MEDLINE and EMBASE
(2010-2014) and an international cohort of 1017 RCTs initiated between
2000 and 2003. Second, pairs of investigators independently and in
duplicate extracted data from publications and corresponding registry
records. Third, for each discontinued RCT, we compared publication
information to registry information. We used multivariable regression to
examine whether accurate labeling of trials as discontinued (vs. other
status) in the registry was associated with recent initiation of RCT,
industry sponsorship, multicenter design, or larger sample size.
Results
We
identified 173 publications of RCTs that were discontinued due to slow
recruitment (55%), harm (16%), futility (11%), benefit (5%), other
reasons (3%), or multiple reasons (9%). Trials were registered with clinicaltrials.gov (77%), isrctn.com
(14%), or other registries (8%). Of the 173 corresponding registry
records, 77 (45%) trials were labeled as discontinued and 57 (33%)
provided a reason for discontinuation (of which 53, 93%, provided the
same reason as in the publication). Labeling of discontinued trials as
“discontinued” (vs. other label) in corresponding trial registry records
improved over time (adjusted odds ratio 1.16 per year, confidence
interval 1.04-1.30) and was possibly associated with industry
sponsorship (2.01, 0.99-4.07) but unlikely with multicenter status
(0.81, 0.32-2.04) or sample size (1.07, 0.89-1.29).
Conclusions
Trial
status information matched in less than half of registry records of
RCTs in our sample with corresponding publications that explicitly
mentioned trial discontinuation; one third of registry records provided a
reason for discontinuation. Current trial status information in
registries should be viewed with caution.
0 comments :
Post a Comment
Your comments?
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.