Compendium of Unpublished Phase III Trials in Oncology: Characteristics and Impact on Clinical Practice

Tam, Vincent C.; Tannock, Ian F.; Massey, Christine; Rauw, Jennifer; Krzyzanowska, Monika K.

doi:10.1200/jco.2010.33.3922

Cited by 32 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…We found that the clinical trial data from 75% of abstracts reporting randomized trials and from 54% of those describing nonrandomized trials were published by March 2015, a statistically significant difference (p , .001). Our 75% rate of publication for abstracts reporting randomized trials in the ASCO database from 2009-2011 is similar to the 56%-91% reported by others who assessed rates of publication of randomized or large trials [1,9,[22][23][24][25][26][27]. Our finding that clinical data from only 54% of abstracts reporting on nonrandomized trials had been published 4-6 years after their ASCO submissions is consistent with the 56%-74% reported by others 5-7.5 years after publication of the abstract [9,10].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 81%

Assessing the Eventual Publication of Clinical Trial Abstracts Submitted to a Large Annual Oncology Meeting

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background. Despite the ethical imperative to publish clinical trials when human subjects are involved, such data frequently remain unpublished. The objectives were to tabulate the rate and ascertain factors associated with eventual publication of clinical trial results reported as abstracts in the Proceedings of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (American Society of Clinical Oncology). Materials and Methods. Abstracts describing clinical trials for patients with breast, lung, colorectal, ovarian, and prostate cancer from 2009 to 2011 were identified by using a comprehensive online database (http://meetinglibrary.asco. org/abstracts). Abstracts included reported results of a treatment or intervention assessed in a discrete, prospective clinical trial. Publication status at 426 years was determined by using a standardized search of PubMed. Primary outcomes were the rate of publication for abstracts of randomized and nonrandomized clinical trials. Secondary outcomes included factors influencing the publication of results. Results. A total of 1,075 abstracts describing 378 randomized and 697 nonrandomized clinical trials were evaluated. Across all years, 75% of randomized and 54% of nonrandomized trials were published, with an overall publication rate of 61%. Sample

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 81%

Assessing the Eventual Publication of Clinical Trial Abstracts Submitted to a Large Annual Oncology Meeting

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Within this cohort, older protocols were more commonly conducted in the adjuvant/curative setting and had longer accrual time. Furthermore, despite prior reports of an association between failure to meet primary endpoints and delay in publication [16], in our cohort, no temporal relationship was observed with the probability of a positive trial. Finally, it is also possible that protocols with more recent dates reflect updated version dates as opposed to original protocol dates.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

Evolution in the eligibility criteria of randomized controlled trials for systemic cancer therapies

Srikanthan

Vera‐Badillo

Ethier

et al. 2016

Cancer Treatment Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…For the remaining 24 reports the weighted mean proportion of abstracts published was 55.9% (95% CI, 54.8% to 56.9%). The proportion of abstracts published for the 7 reports that only included abstracts of clinical trials [3, 11, 18, 21, 23, 28, 32] was 73.0% (95%CI, 71.2% to 74.7%).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Authors report lack of time as main reason for unpublished research presented at biomedical conferences: a systematic review

Scherer

Ugarte-Gil

Schmucker

et al. 2015

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

125

104

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To systematically review reports that queried abstract authors about reasons for not subsequently publishing abstract results as full length articles. Study Design and setting Systematic review of Medline, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, ISI Web of Science and study bibliographies for empirical studies in which investigators examined subsequent full publication of results presented at a biomedical conference and reasons for non-publication. Results The mean full publication rate was 55.9% (95% CI, 54.8% to 56.9%) for 24 of 27 eligible reports providing this information, and 73.0% (95% CI, 71.2% to 74.7%) for 7 reports of abstracts describing clinical trials. 24 studies itemized 1,831 reasons for non-publication, and 6 itemized 428 reasons considered the most important reason. Lack of time was the most frequently reported reason (weighted average = 30.2% (95% CI, 27.9% to 32.4%)) and the most important reason (weighted average = 38.4% (95% CI, 33.7% to 43.2%)). Other commonly stated reasons were lack of time and/or resources, publication not an aim, low priority, incomplete study and trouble with co-authors. Conclusions Across medical specialties, the main reasons for not subsequently publishing an abstract in full lies with factors related to the abstract author rather than with journals.

show abstract

Compendium of Unpublished Phase III Trials in Oncology: Characteristics and Impact on Clinical Practice

Cited by 32 publications

References 15 publications

Assessing the Eventual Publication of Clinical Trial Abstracts Submitted to a Large Annual Oncology Meeting

Assessing the Eventual Publication of Clinical Trial Abstracts Submitted to a Large Annual Oncology Meeting

Evolution in the eligibility criteria of randomized controlled trials for systemic cancer therapies

Authors report lack of time as main reason for unpublished research presented at biomedical conferences: a systematic review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About