Disparities in positive results and dissemination of randomized controlled trials in immuno-oncology.

IF 4.3 4区 医学 Q2 IMMUNOLOGY
Cheng Xu, Shu Zhang, Guang-Li Zhu, Kai-Bin Yang, Yuan Zhang, Yan-Ping Mao, Ling-Long Tang, Qing Liu, Ying Huang, Jun Ma
{"title":"Disparities in positive results and dissemination of randomized controlled trials in immuno-oncology.","authors":"Cheng Xu,&nbsp;Shu Zhang,&nbsp;Guang-Li Zhu,&nbsp;Kai-Bin Yang,&nbsp;Yuan Zhang,&nbsp;Yan-Ping Mao,&nbsp;Ling-Long Tang,&nbsp;Qing Liu,&nbsp;Ying Huang,&nbsp;Jun Ma","doi":"10.1080/08830185.2022.2088744","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This cross-sectional and longitudinal analysis aimed to demonstrate the disparities in positive results and dissemination patterns of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in global immuno-oncology (IO).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Phase II-IV RCTs with results reported by article publications registered on ClinicalTrials.gov in 2007-2018 studying immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), adoptive cell transfer, cancer vaccines, and immune modulators were included.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-eight percent of trials were positive (72 of 258), most of which were pharma-sponsored and focused on ICI and multiple IO therapies in lung cancer, melanoma, and multiple cancer types. The recent period of trial start year, upfront registration, large sample size, high strictness score on corticosteroid/infection-related criteria, and survival endpoints were associated with positive results. Trials from Mainland China had a faster publication timeline of positive results but lacked study diversity or full reporting of negative results compared with US and multinational trials. Compared with phase II trials, phase III-IV trials had a higher average proportion of positive results (28.9% vs. 22.2%) and a more stable change over the past decade (23.65% vs. 49.24%). Positive trials yielded more secondary manuscripts (10 vs. 4), a shorter publication process of approximately two years (<i>P</i> < 0.001), and a superiority in the dissemination of journals with an h-index >90 (<i>P</i> < 0.001) compared with negative trials.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Disparities in positive result dissemination are widespread in IO RCTs and affected by trial features. We proposed improvements in upfront registration, procedural integrity, and adequate inclusion of rival trials reporting negative results within the earlier two years in future reviews.</p>","PeriodicalId":14333,"journal":{"name":"International Reviews of Immunology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Reviews of Immunology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08830185.2022.2088744","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"IMMUNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: This cross-sectional and longitudinal analysis aimed to demonstrate the disparities in positive results and dissemination patterns of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in global immuno-oncology (IO).

Methods: Phase II-IV RCTs with results reported by article publications registered on ClinicalTrials.gov in 2007-2018 studying immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), adoptive cell transfer, cancer vaccines, and immune modulators were included.

Results: Twenty-eight percent of trials were positive (72 of 258), most of which were pharma-sponsored and focused on ICI and multiple IO therapies in lung cancer, melanoma, and multiple cancer types. The recent period of trial start year, upfront registration, large sample size, high strictness score on corticosteroid/infection-related criteria, and survival endpoints were associated with positive results. Trials from Mainland China had a faster publication timeline of positive results but lacked study diversity or full reporting of negative results compared with US and multinational trials. Compared with phase II trials, phase III-IV trials had a higher average proportion of positive results (28.9% vs. 22.2%) and a more stable change over the past decade (23.65% vs. 49.24%). Positive trials yielded more secondary manuscripts (10 vs. 4), a shorter publication process of approximately two years (P < 0.001), and a superiority in the dissemination of journals with an h-index >90 (P < 0.001) compared with negative trials.

Conclusion: Disparities in positive result dissemination are widespread in IO RCTs and affected by trial features. We proposed improvements in upfront registration, procedural integrity, and adequate inclusion of rival trials reporting negative results within the earlier two years in future reviews.

免疫肿瘤学随机对照试验阳性结果的差异和传播。
背景:本横断面和纵向分析旨在证明全球免疫肿瘤学(IO)随机对照试验(rct)阳性结果和传播模式的差异。方法:纳入2007-2018年在ClinicalTrials.gov上注册的研究免疫检查点抑制剂(ICIs)、过继细胞转移、癌症疫苗和免疫调节剂的II-IV期随机对照试验。结果:28%的试验是阳性的(258个中的72个),其中大多数是制药公司赞助的,专注于肺癌、黑色素瘤和多种癌症类型的ICI和多种IO治疗。最近的试验开始年份、前期注册、大样本量、皮质类固醇/感染相关标准的高严格评分和生存终点与阳性结果相关。与美国和多国试验相比,来自中国大陆的试验阳性结果的发表时间更快,但缺乏研究多样性或对阴性结果的全面报道。与II期试验相比,III-IV期试验的平均阳性结果比例更高(28.9%比22.2%),并且在过去十年中的变化更稳定(23.65%比49.24%)。阳性试验产生了更多的次要论文(10篇vs. 4篇),发表过程更短,大约两年(P 90)。结论:在IO随机对照试验中,阳性结果传播的差异很普遍,并受到试验特征的影响。我们建议在未来的综述中改进前期注册、程序完整性,并充分纳入前两年报告阴性结果的竞争试验。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
11.00
自引率
4.00%
发文量
24
期刊介绍: This review journal provides the most current information on basic and translational research in immunology and related fields. In addition to invited reviews, the journal accepts for publication articles and editorials on relevant topics proposed by contributors. Each issue of International Reviews of Immunology contains both solicited and unsolicited review articles, editorials, and ''In-this-Issue'' highlights. The journal also hosts reviews that position the authors'' original work relative to advances in a given field, bridging the gap between annual reviews and the original research articles. This review series is relevant to all immunologists, molecular biologists, microbiologists, translational scientists, industry researchers, and physicians who work in basic and clinical immunology, inflammatory and allergic diseases, vaccines, and additional topics relevant to medical research and drug development that connect immunology to disciplines such as oncology, cardiovascular disease, and metabolic disorders. Covered in International Reviews of Immunology: Basic and developmental immunology (innate and adaptive immunity; inflammation; and tumor and microbial immunology); Clinical research (mechanisms of disease in man pertaining to infectious diseases, autoimmunity, allergy, oncology / immunology); and Translational research (relevant to biomarkers, diagnostics, vaccines, and drug development).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信