6010 Background: Translation of evidence-based medicine into clinical practice depends on timely and full publication of clinical trials. Previous studies have shown that a substantial number of phase I and III trials presented at the annual meetings of ASCO remain unpublished more than 5 years after presentation. We investigated the outcome of phase II trials presented at ASCO. Methods: We searched for phase II trials using the 1997 ASCO Annual Meeting Proceedings. We excluded trials reporting only preliminary data or interim analyses. The following information were extracted from each study: type of presentation, country of origin, sample size, sponsor, treatment modality, novelty of treatment, and efficacy. A literature search was performed using the Medline and EMBASE databases up until January 2006 for full publications in peer-reviewed journals. If a trial was not found, the authors were contacted by E-mail. Results: We identified 124 phase II trials with 13.7%, 30.6%, and 55.6% presented orally, in poster, and in print, respectively. Most trials were either submitted from countries in North America (50.8%) or Europe (34.7%). Funding came from the pharmaceutical companies (24.2%), governments (20.2%), study institutions (15.3%), private foundations (9.7%), or was not specified (30.6%). The top 5 cancers studied were lung, breast, ovarian, gastric, and sarcoma. Treatment included mostly chemotherapy, either alone (87.1%) or in combination with other modalities (3.2%). To date only 70.2% of the trials have been published. The median time to publication for all abstracts was 23 months. The cumulative rates of publication were 12.9%, 34.7%, 51.6%, 64.5%, and 68.5% at 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7 years, respectively. None of the factors we analyzed, including type of presentation, country of origin, sample size, sponsor, novelty of treatment, and efficacy, influenced the likelihood of or time to publication. Conclusions: About a third of phase II oncology clinical trials initially presented as abstracts at the 1997 ASCO annual meeting have not been published almost a decade later. Similar to phase I and III trials, underreporting of phase II trials is an important problem with serious implications for clinical practice that needs to be addressed. No significant financial relationships to disclose.
PCN126 REVIEW OF PATIENT-REPORTED OUTCOMES IN PHASE II ONCOLOGY CLINICAL TRIALS