In:
JAMA Network Open, American Medical Association (AMA), Vol. 6, No. 5 ( 2023-05-17), p. e2313819-
Abstract:
Primary end point (PEP) changes to an active clinical trial raise questions regarding trial quality and the risk of outcome reporting bias. It is unknown how the frequency and transparency of the reported changes depend on reporting method and whether the PEP changes are associated with trial positivity (ie, the trial met the prespecified statistical threshold for PEP positivity). Objectives To assess the frequency of reported PEP changes in oncology randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and whether these changes are associated with trial positivity. Design, Setting, and Participants This cross-sectional study used publicly available data for complete oncology phase 3 RCTs registered in ClinicalTrials.gov from inception through February 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures The main outcome was change between the initial PEP and the final reported PEP, assessed using 3 methods: (1) history of tracked changes on ClinicalTrials.gov, (2) self-reported changes noted in the article, and (3) changes reported within the protocol, including all available protocol documents. Logistic regression analyses were performed to evaluate whether PEP changes were associated with US Food and Drug Administration approval or trial positivity. Results Of 755 included trials, 145 (19.2%) had PEP changes found by at least 1 of the 3 detection methods. Of the 145 trials with PEP changes, 102 (70.3%) did not have PEP changes disclosed within the manuscript. There was significant variability in rates of PEP detection by each method ( χ 2 = 72.1; P & amp;lt; .001). Across all methods, PEP changes were detected at higher rates when multiple versions of the protocol (47 of 148 [31.8%]) were available compared with 1 version (22 of 134 [16.4%] ) or no protocol (76 of 473 [16.1%]) ( χ 2 = 18.7; P & amp;lt; .001). Multivariable analysis demonstrated that PEP changes were associated with trial positivity (odds ratio, 1.86; 95% CI, 1.25-2.82; P = .003). Conclusions and Relevance This cross-sectional study revealed substantial rates of PEP changes among active RCTs; PEP changes were markedly underreported in published articles and mostly occurred after reported study completion dates. Significant discrepancies in the rate of detected PEP changes call into question the role of increased protocol transparency and completeness in identifying key changes occurring in active trials.
Type of Medium:
Online Resource
ISSN:
2574-3805
DOI:
10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.13819
Language:
English
Publisher:
American Medical Association (AMA)
Publication Date:
2023
detail.hit.zdb_id:
2931249-8
