scholarly journals Is there reporting and citation bias for completed phase III interventional brain tumor trials?

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Appaji Rayi ◽  
Iyad Alnahhas ◽  
Pierre Giglio ◽  
Vinay Puduvalli
Keyword(s):  
Brain Tumor ◽  
Median Time ◽  
Positive Outcome ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Funding Source ◽  
Source Type ◽  
Citation Bias ◽  
Dissemination Of Results ◽  
Number Of Citations ◽  
Negative Outcome

AIMS: Reporting and citation bias based on positive versus negative outcome among completed phase III interventional brain tumor trials (IBTTs) have not been previously reported. Thus, we aimed to assess the evidence. METHODS: Clinicaltrials.gov was used to obtain all phase III IBTTs completed prior to December 31st 2016. Trials closed due to poor accrual or non-phase III were excluded. Data about the funding source, type of intervention, conducted at U.S or Non-U.S locations, patients enrolled, primary completion date, time to dissemination of results in months (either reported on Clinicaltrials.gov or published in a journal), citations per year (from web of science) and outcome (positive or neutral/negative) were abstracted. Median time to dissemination was estimated using Kaplan-Meier estimates and a log rank test for statistical significance. The number of citations per year for positive and negative/neutral studies was compared using a t-test. RESULTS: 67 studies were analyzed. The median time from primary completion to dissemination of results for trials with a positive outcome was 20 months (n = 20; 95% CI: 12-31) compared to 30 months for trials with a negative outcome (n=35; 95 % CI: 22 - 37) (p = 0.095). The average number of citations per year for trials with a positive outcome is 62.4 (n = 21; range 1.1 - 614.8) compared to 25.0 for trials with a negative outcome (n=35; range 0.14 - 158.8) (p = 0.213). There was no significant difference in time to dissemination based on the funding source, type of intervention or the location where the trial was conducted. CONCLUSION: There was no evidence of reporting or citation bias among completed phase III IBTTs. Nevertheless, positive phase III IBTTs were reported more promptly and cited more often compared to negative or neutral trials. These findings might need consideration for risk of bias assessment while conducting systematic reviews.

scholarly journals EPID-32. IS THERE ANY EVIDENCE OF REPORTING AND CITATION BIAS AMONG COMPLETED PHASE III INTERVENTIONAL BRAIN TUMOR TRIALS?

2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (Supplement_6) ◽  
pp. vi81-vi81
Author(s):  
Appaji Rayi ◽  
Iyad Alnahhas ◽  
Rachel Smith ◽  
Pierre Giglio ◽  
Vinay Puduvalli
Keyword(s):  
Brain Tumor ◽  
Median Time ◽  
Positive Outcome ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Funding Source ◽  
Source Type ◽  
Citation Bias ◽  
Dissemination Of Results ◽  
Number Of Citations ◽  
Negative Outcome

Abstract OBJECTIVE Reporting and citation bias based on positive versus negative outcome among completed phase III interventional brain tumor trials (IBTTs) have not been previously reported. Thus, we aimed to assess the evidence. METHODS Clinicaltrials.gov was used to obtain all phase III IBTTs completed prior to December 31st 2016. Trials closed due to poor accrual or non-phase III were excluded. Data about the funding source, type of intervention, conducted at U.S or Non-U.S locations, patients enrolled, primary completion date, time to dissemination of results in months (either reported on clinicaltrials.gov or published in a journal), citations per year (from web of science) and outcome (positive or neutral/negative) were abstracted. Median time to dissemination was estimated using Kaplan-Meier estimates and a log rank test for statistical significance. The number of citations per year for positive and negative/neutral studies was compared using a t-test. RESULTS 65 studies were analyzed. The median time from primary completion to dissemination of results for trials with a positive outcome was 20 months (n = 20; 95% CI: 12–31) compared to 30 months for trials with a negative outcome (n=35; 95 % CI: 22 – 37) (p = 0.095). The average number of citations per year for trials with a positive outcome is 62.4 (n = 21; range 1.1 – 614.8) compared to 25.0 for trials with a negative outcome (n=35; range 0.14 - 158.8) (p = 0.213). There was no significant difference in time to dissemination based on the funding source, type of intervention or the location where the trial was conducted. CONCLUSION Positive phase III IBTTs results are disseminated earlier and are cited more frequently compared to negative trials. However, there is no statistically significant evidence of reporting or citation bias.

The Outcome Effect and Professional Skepticism: A Replication and a Failed Attempt at Mitigation

2018 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 135-143 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph F. Brazel ◽  
Christine Gimbar ◽  
Eldar M. Maksymov ◽  
Tammie J. Schaefer
Keyword(s):  
Positive Outcome ◽  
Original Study ◽  
Research Note ◽  
Data Availability ◽  
Professional Skepticism ◽  
Initial Effect ◽  
Additional Testing ◽  
Failed Attempt ◽  
Negative Outcome

ABSTRACT In this research note, we replicate Brazel, Jackson, Schaefer, and Stewart's (2016) study of how auditors evaluate skeptical behavior. Like the original study, we find that evaluators reward audit staff who exercise appropriate levels of skepticism and identify a misstatement (positive outcome). However, when no misstatement is identified (negative outcome), evaluators penalize staff who exercise appropriate levels of skepticism. One factor causing this outcome effect may be that exercising skepticism typically causes budget overages due to additional testing. Hence, we examine whether formally attributing the budget overage to skeptical judgments and actions in the audit budget file reduces outcome effects. However, while replicating the initial effect across three separate studies, we have been unable to reduce this effect. Thus, it is clear that the outcome effect in this context is very robust. Data Availability: Contact the authors.

scholarly journals Least Likely Observations in Regression Models for Categorical Outcomes

2002 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 296-300 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeremy Freese
Keyword(s):  
Logistic Regression ◽  
Regression Models ◽  
Binary Logistic Regression ◽  
Positive Outcome ◽  
Ordinary Least Squares ◽  
Parameter Estimates ◽  
Least Squares Regression ◽  
Binary Logistic Regression Model ◽  
Ordered Logistic Regression ◽  
Negative Outcome

This article presents a method and program for identifying poorly fitting observations for maximum-likelihood regression models for categorical dependent variables. After estimating a model, the program leastlikely will list the observations that have the lowest predicted probabilities of observing the value of the outcome category that was actually observed. For example, when run after estimating a binary logistic regression model, leastlikely will list the observations with a positive outcome that had the lowest predicted probabilities of a positive outcome and the observations with a negative outcome that had the lowest predicted probabilities of a negative outcome. These can be considered the observations in which the outcome is most surprising given the values of the independent variables and the parameter estimates and, like observations with large residuals in ordinary least squares regression, may warrant individual inspection. Use of the program is illustrated with examples using binary and ordered logistic regression.

Echocardiography for the 10-year prediction of cardiomyopathy in long-term survivors of childhood cancer

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
J.M Leerink ◽  
H.J.H Van Der Pal ◽  
E.A.M Feijen ◽  
P.G Meregalli ◽  
M.S Pourier ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Childhood Cancer ◽  
Median Time ◽  
Cancer Diagnosis ◽  
Predictive Value ◽  
Validation Cohort ◽  
Funding Source ◽  
Derivation Cohort ◽  
After Cancer ◽  
Radiotherapy Dose

Abstract Background Childhood cancer survivors (CCS) treated with anthracyclines and/or chest-directed radiotherapy receive life-long echocardiographic surveillance to detect cardiomyopathy early. Current risk stratification and surveillance frequency recommendations are based on anthracycline- and chest-directed radiotherapy dose. We assessed the added prognostic value of an initial left ventricular ejection fraction (EF) measurement at >5 years after cancer diagnosis. Patients and methods Echocardiographic follow-up was performed in asymptomatic CCS from the Emma Children's Hospital (derivation; n=299; median time after diagnosis, 16.7 years [inter quartile range (IQR) 11.8–23.15]) and from the Radboud University Medical Center (validation; n=218, median time after diagnosis, 17.0 years [IQR 13.0–21.7]) in the Netherlands. CCS with cardiomyopathy at baseline were excluded (n=16). The endpoint was cardiomyopathy, defined as a clinically significant decreased EF (EF<40%). The predictive value of the initial EF at >5 years after cancer diagnosis was analyzed with multivariable Cox regression models in the derivation cohort and the model was validated in the validation cohort. Results The median follow-up after the initial EF was 10.9 years and 8.9 years in the derivation and validation cohort, respectively, with cardiomyopathy developing in 11/299 (3.7%) and 7/218 (3.2%), respectively. Addition of the initial EF on top of anthracycline and chest radiotherapy dose increased the C-index from 0.75 to 0.85 in the derivation cohort and from 0.71 to 0.92 in the validation cohort (p<0.01). The model was well calibrated at 10-year predicted probabilities up to 5%. An initial EF between 40–49% was associated with a hazard ratio of 6.8 (95% CI 1.8–25) for development of cardiomyopathy during follow-up. For those with a predicted 10-year cardiomyopathy probability <3% (76.9% of the derivation cohort and 74.3% of validation cohort) the negative predictive value was >99% in both cohorts. Conclusion The addition of the initial EF >5 years after cancer diagnosis to anthracycline- and chest-directed radiotherapy dose improves the 10-year cardiomyopathy prediction in CCS. Our validated prediction model identifies low-risk survivors in whom the surveillance frequency may be reduced to every 10 years. Calibration in both cohorts Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: Foundation. Main funding source(s): Dutch Heart Foundation

BOIN: A novel Bayesian design platform to accelerate early phase brain tumor clinical trials

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ying Yuan ◽  
Jing Wu ◽  
Mark R Gilbert
Keyword(s):  
Brain Tumor ◽  
Brain Tumors ◽  
Early Phase ◽  
Late Onset ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Combination Regimen ◽  
Operating Characteristics ◽  
Optimal Interval ◽  
Phase Iii Trials

Abstract Despite decades of extensive research, the progress in developing effective treatments for primary brain tumors lags behind that of other cancers, largely due to the unique challenges of brain tumors (e.g., the blood-brain barrier and high heterogeneity) that limit the delivery and efficacy of many therapeutic agents. One way to address this issue is to employ novel trial designs to better optimize the treatment regimen (e.g., dose and schedule) in early phase trials to improve the success rate of subsequent phase III trials. The objective of this article is to introduce Bayesian optimal interval (BOIN) designs as a novel platform to design various types of early phase brain tumor trials, including single-agent and combination regimen trials, trials with late-onset toxicities, and trials aiming to find the optimal biological dose (OBD) based on both toxicity and efficacy. Unlike many novel Bayesian adaptive designs, which are difficult to understand and complicated to implement by clinical investigators, the BOIN designs are self-explanatory and user friendly, yet yield more robust and powerful operating characteristics than conventional designs. We illustrate the BOIN designs using a phase I clinical trial of brain tumor, and provide software (freely available at www.trialdesign.org) to facilitate the application of the BOIN design.

Rilonacept: A Newly Approved Treatment for Recurrent Pericarditis

2021 ◽  
pp. 106002802110364
Author(s):  
Nicholas C. Schwier
Keyword(s):  
Median Time ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
C Reactive Protein ◽  
Recurrent Pericarditis ◽  
Risk Of Recurrence ◽  
Reactive Protein ◽  
Prevention And Treatment ◽  
Background Therapy ◽  
Tract Infections

Objective To review the pharmacology, efficacy, and safety of rilonacept for the prevention and treatment of recurrent pericarditis (RP). Data Sources A MEDLINE search was conducted between January 2006 and April 2021 using the following terms: rilonacept, pharmacology, pericarditis, recurrent pericarditis, interleukin (IL) antagonist, and pharmacology; prescribing information was also used. Study Selection and Data Extraction English-language studies assessing pharmacology, efficacy, and safety of IL antagonists were reviewed. Data Synthesis Rilonacept traps IL-1α and IL-1β. In the Phase III trial, rilonacept was associated with a lower risk of recurrence, more persistent clinical response, and higher amount of days with no or minimal pericarditis symptoms, compared with placebo. The median time to pain response was 5 days, and median time to normalization of C-reactive protein was 7 days with rilonacept. All patients receiving rilonacept during the run-in period were able to be weaned off of standard background therapy, leading to transition to rilonacept monotherapy. The most common adverse effects were upper respiratory tract infections and injection site reactions. Relevance to Patient Care and Clinical Practice Rilonacept may be used for the prevention and treatment of multiple recurrences in patients receiving background therapy for RP, and reduction in risk of recurrence in adults and adolescents ≥12 years with elevated C-reactive protein. Rilonacept may be considered to wean patients from standard background therapy. Conclusion Rilonacept is a safe, once weekly, subcutaneously administered IL-1 “trap,” indicated for the treatment of RP, and reduction in risk of recurrent pericarditis in adults and children ≥12 years of age.

PP126 MEA In Italy: Correlation Between Time To Payment By Result And Time To Off Treatment Curve

2017 ◽  
Vol 33 (S1) ◽  
pp. 131-132
Author(s):  
Gabriele Vittoria ◽  
Antonio Fascì ◽  
Matteo Ferrario ◽  
Giovanni Giuliani
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Treatment Failure ◽  
Median Time ◽  
Real Life ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Experimental Drug ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Line Of Therapy ◽  
Mean Time

INTRODUCTION:Payment by result agreements have been quite widely used in Italy to provide access for high costs oncologic drugs and minimize uncertainties of real life benefits (1). The aim of this analysis was to overview the Roche experience in terms of Payment by Result (Pbr) in oncology and investigate the relation between timing for the evaluation of treatment failures and observed Time to Off Treatment (TTOT) from Phase III clinical trials (2).METHODS:A retrospective analysis of the Roche payment by results schemes in place in Italy was conducted. For each drug included in the analysis it was collected: (i) the negotiated timing to assess the treatment failure for payment by result, (ii) the median time to off treatment curve observed in clinical trials for the experimental drug, (iii) the median time to off treatment observed in clinical trials for the control arm. The mean ratios between timing to assess the treatment failure for payment by result and the time to off treatment observed for the experimental drug or the median time to off treatment observed in the control arm were calculated to identify potential correlations. High level of correlation was expected if ratio was close to 1 (±.2).RESULTS:Roche products or different indications of the same product were identified as candidates for the analysis from 2008 to 2016. The timing for the evaluation of treatment failures for Pbr varies between 2 and 9 months, depending on the type of tumor and line of therapy. The mean Time to Payment By Result (TTPbr) / Control arm Time To Off Treatment (cTTOT) ratio was 1.16 (±.37) while the mean Time to Payment By Result (TTPbr) / Experimental arm Time To Off Treatment (eTTOT) ratio was .71 (±.13). Data analysis according to different time periods shows that the mean TTPbr/cTTOT and TTPbr/eTTOT for drugs negotiated from 2008 to 2015 were respectively 1.07 and 1.39 whereas for drugs negotiated in 2016 were respectively and .63 and 1.CONCLUSIONS:Good level of correlation between TTPbr and cTTOT was found. This finding is in line with the methodology used by Italian Medicines Agency so far, leveraging the cTTOT as the most appropriate proxy to assess any incremental effect of a new drug compared to the previous Standard of Care. The analysis over time of TTPbr shows that in the first years of payment by result negotiation TTPbr is more correlated to the cTTOT whereas in the last years is moving closer to the experimental one.

T1 Top Line Results of the DETECT Enzymatic Debridement Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S1-S1
Author(s):  
William L Hickerson ◽  
Jeremy Goverman ◽  
Sigrid A Blome-Eberwein ◽  
Adam Singer ◽  
Lucy Wibbenmeyer
Keyword(s):  
Median Time ◽  
Wound Closure ◽  
The United States ◽  
Acute Stage ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Long Term Follow Up

Abstract Introduction Bromelain Based Debridement (BBD) of deep burns is approved for use in Europe, Argentina, Russia, South Korea, Peru and Israel. In the United States it is an investigational product and currently there are 2 multicenter RCTs (DETECT – adults, CIDS – children). Patient enrollment in the DETECT adult trial has been completed. The aim of this abstract is to present the acute stage top line results of the DETECT trial. Methods 175 adult patients suffering from deep burns were included in a phase III multicenter, multinational, randomized, controlled, assessor blinded trial. Patients were randomized to 3 arms – BBD, Standard of Care (SOC), or Gel vehicle (Placebo control) in a 3:3:1 ratio (75 BBD, 75 SOC, 25 Gel). The primary endpoint was the incidence of complete eschar removal (BBD vs Gel). Additional acute stage endpoints included the time to complete eschar removal, incidence of surgical eschar removal and eschar removal associated blood loss.Time to complete wound closure (BBD vs SOC) was assessed as a safety endpoint. Following the acute stage, a long-term follow up period of 2 years is being conducted. Results Patient demographics and wound baseline characteristics were comparable across study arms.The incidence of complete eschar removal was significantly higher for BBD vs Gel patients (93.3% vs 4%, p< 0.0001). The incidence of surgical eschar removal was significantly lower for BBD vs SOC patients (4% vs 72%, p< 0.0001). The median time to complete eschar removal was significantly shorter for BBD vs SOC patients (1 day vs 3.8 days, p< 0.0001). Calculated eschar removal associated blood loss was significantly lower for BBD vs SOC patients (14ml vs 815ml, p< 0.0001). The median time to complete wound closure was similar for BBD and SOC patients (27 and 28 days). The overall safety profile of BBD treated patients was good and consistent with the safety data known from previous studies.The results of the long term follow up period are not yet available. Conclusions The acute stage results of this robust phase III RCT demonstrate the safety and efficacy of BBD and are in line with previous trial results. Applicability of Research to Practice The results of this trial may help pave the way for US approval of BBD.

Safety, efficacy, and time to clinical response with bevacizumab plus FOLFIRI regimen in metastatic colorectal cancer

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e15138-e15138
Author(s):  
S. Tomao ◽  
G. Spinelli ◽  
L. Rossi ◽  
G. Pasciuti ◽  
G. Arcangeli ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Clinical Response ◽  
Median Time ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Clinical Activity ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
First Line ◽  
Ecog Ps

e15138 Background: Bevacizumab (BEV) has shown clinical activity in metastatic colorectal cancer patients (mCRC)and randomised phase III trials have demonstrated that this agent significantly improves overall and/or progression-free survival when added to first-line irinotecan based chemotherapy (CT) regimens. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of BEV plus FOLFIRI (irinotecan, 5- fluorouracil, and leucovorin) as first line treatment in 27 consecutive metastatic colorectal cancer cases, with the primary end point to calculate the median time to clinical response with this chemotherapeutic schedule. Methods: Between October 2007 and January 2008 we collected the data on 27 patients with mCRC treated with first line chemotherapy with BEV plus FOLFIRI. Elegibility criteria had to be: mCRC; no prior CT for metastatic disease; ECOG PS 0/1, adequate organ function; no CNS metastases. The treatment consisted of a minimum of six cycles of irinotecan plus infusional 5-FU/LV according to the classical FOLFIRI schedule; BEV (5mg/kg) was given on day 1 with CT and then every 2 weeks until disease progression. Safety and response were assessed at the time of first CT and every 4 weeks thereafter. Results: 27 pts were evaluable (male 18; median age 61 years (range 45–77), ECOG PS 0: 52%, PS 1: 48%. The sites of metastases were: liver (15 pts), lung (5 pts), liver and lung (5 pts), peritoneal wall (2 pts).Median follow-up was 18 weeks. Two patients had complete response(CR) and 13 pts partial response (PR), with an overall response rate of 57.7%. Five patients had stable disease and 6 patients showed progressive disease. A clinical benefit was demonstrated in 77 % of pts. We observed a median time to clinical response of 11 weeks, evaluated with tumor markers and with CT/NMR/US examinations. A grade 3 or 4 neutropenia was detected in 39% of pts and grade 2 or 3 hypertension in 9%. We did’nt observe cases of thrombosis, bleeding and gastrointestinal perforation, sometimes related to the use of BEV. Conclusions: In this little experience the efficacy and safety of BEV associated with FOLFIRI schedule, a first line therapy in mCRC,is consistent with results from other previous studies, showing moreover a short time to clinical response with this association. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Randomized phase III trial to evaluate radiopharmaceuticals and zoledronic acid in the palliation of osteoblastic metastases from lung, breast, and prostate cancer: Report of RTOG 0517.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS9150-TPS9150 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael J. Seider ◽  
Stephanie Shook ◽  
Corey J. Langer ◽  
Gwen Wyatt ◽  
William F. Demas ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Zoledronic Acid ◽  
Bone Metastases ◽  
Median Time ◽  
Standard Dose ◽  
Cox Proportional Hazards ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Relative Reduction

TPS9150 Background: Skeletal related events (SREs) diminish quality of life (QOL) as well as overall survival (OS) in patients with bone metastases, a common event in breast, lung and prostate cancer. SREs can be reduced or delayed by the use of bisphosphonates. It is postulated that the radiopharmaceuticals, Strontium-89 (Sr89) and Samarium-153 (Sm153), when added to a bisphosphonate can decrease the incidence of SREs. Methods: RTOG 0517 randomized patients with breast, lung and prostate cancer and blastic bone metastases to either Zoledronic acid (ZA) alone or ZA plus a single standard dose of either Sr89 or Sm153. No limitations were placed on additional therapy such as chemotherapy or hormonal treatment. The projected median time to SRE [pathological bone fracture, spinal cord compression, surgery to bone, or radiation to bone] for the ZA arm was 10.4 months requiring 257 SRE events to detect a 33% relative reduction for the radiopharmaceutical arm in the time to development of an SRE with 90% power. Other study objectives included quality of life, pain control, OS and toxicity. Results: 261 patients (median age 68; 62% male; 55% prostate, 35% breast, 10% lung) were accrued from July 2006 through February 2011 (4.6 patients/month). Due to a lower than expected rate of SREs in the control (ZA) arm, the study was closed early and therefore did not reach the targeted accrual. 28 (17.4%) patients in the ZA arm and 27 (16.8%) in the radiopharmaceutical arm experienced an SRE. Median time to development of an SRE in the ZA and radiopharmaceutical arms was 11.60 and 16.74 months, respectively (p=.47). Median OS in the ZA arm and radiopharmaceutical arm was 15.95 and 11.18 months, respectively (p=0.12). Cox proportional hazards regression model showed that baseline characteristics, including gender, race, ethnicity, primary disease site or number of bone metastases, had no significant impact on OS. There was no difference in QOL parameters or toxicities between the two arms. Conclusion: Patients receiving ZA only experienced a much lower SRE rate than was hypothesized. The addition of Sr89 or Sm153 did not result in a difference in SREs, OS, or QOL

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document