Rptg. Bias in Drug Trls Submitted to FDA

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-09-2008
Rptg. Bias in Drug Trls Submitted to FDA
3
Wed, 12-24-2008 - 8:31am

And this is why I don't pay much attention to studies. Full text is located at link below.


http://medicine.plosjournals.org/perlserv/?request=get-document&doi=10.1371/journal.pmed.0050217


Reporting Bias in Drug Trials Submitted to the Food and Drug Administration: Review of Publication and Presentation

Kristin Rising1¤, Peter Bacchetti2, Lisa Bero3*


1 School of Medicine, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, United States of America, 2 Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, United States of America, 3 Clinical Pharmacy and Health Policy, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, United States of America



Background

Previous studies of drug trials submitted to regulatory authorities have documented selective reporting of both entire trials and favorable results. The objective of this study is to determine the publication rate of efficacy trials submitted to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in approved New Drug Applications (NDAs) and to compare the trial characteristics as reported by the FDA with those reported in publications.


Methods and Findings

This is an observational study of all efficacy trials found in approved NDAs for New Molecular Entities (NMEs) from 2001 to 2002 inclusive and all published clinical trials corresponding to the trials within the NDAs. For each trial included in the NDA, we assessed its publication status, primary outcome(s) reported and their statistical significance, and conclusions. Seventy-eight percent (128/164) of efficacy trials contained in FDA reviews of NDAs were published. In a multivariate model, trials with favorable primary outcomes (OR = 4.7, 95% confidence interval 1.33–17.1, p = 0.018) and active controls (OR = 3.4, 95% CI 1.02–11.2, p = 0.047) were more likely to be published. Forty-one primary outcomes from the NDAs were omitted from the papers. Papers included 155 outcomes that were in the NDAs, 15 additional outcomes that favored the test drug, and two other neutral or unknown additional outcomes. Excluding outcomes with unknown significance, there were 43 outcomes in the NDAs that did not favor the NDA drug. Of these, 20 (47%) were not included in the papers. The statistical significance of five of the remaining 23 outcomes (22%) changed between the NDA and the paper, with four changing to favor the test drug in the paper (p = 0.38). Excluding unknowns, 99 conclusions were provided in both NDAs and papers, nine conclusions (9%) changed from the FDA review of the NDA to the paper, and all nine did so to favor the test drug (100%, 95% CI 72%–100%, p = 0.0039).


Conclusions

Many trials were still not published 5 y after FDA approval. Discrepancies between the trial information reviewed by the FDA and information found in published trials tended to lead to more favorable presentations of the NDA drugs in the publications. Thus, the information that is readily available in the scientific literature to health care professionals is incomplete and potentially biased.


Funding: This publication was supported by NIH/NCRR UCSF-CTSI Grant Number UL1 RR024131. Its contents are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of the NIH. The sponsor played no role in the design, conduct, analysis of this research, decision to submit the article, or preparation of the article.


Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.


Academic Editor: John Ioannidis, University of Ioannina, Greece


Citation: Rising K,

Rands

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-02-2009
Tue, 01-06-2009 - 7:44pm
Thank you for sharing this. Interesting, but not surprising.
http://insidevaccines.com/wordpress
iVillage Member
Registered: 09-09-2007
Tue, 01-06-2009 - 10:58pm
You mean they weren't completely forthcoming???? Whaaaaaaat? I'm shocked.
Photobucket Thanks to Andie for my siggy!



Photobucket
Photobucket
Photobucket



Photobucket
iVillage Member
Registered: 04-09-2008
Wed, 01-07-2009 - 7:13am
Our system needs a lot of help - unfortunately, it's things like this that bring all into question....
Photobucket Photobucket

Rands