首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>PLoS Clinical Trials >Does access to clinical study reports from the European Medicines Agency reduce reporting biases? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials on the effect of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents in cancer patients
【2h】

Does access to clinical study reports from the European Medicines Agency reduce reporting biases? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials on the effect of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents in cancer patients

机译:从欧洲药品管理局获得临床研究报告是否可以减少报告偏倚?癌症患者促红细胞生成药物作用的随机对照试验的系统评价和荟萃分析

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Since 2010, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) has provided access to clinical study reports (CSRs). We requested CSRs for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) in cancer patients from EMA and identified RCT publications with literature searches. We assessed CSR availability and completeness, the impact of unreported and unpublished data obtained from CSRs on the effects of ESAs on quality of life (QoL) of cancer patients, and discrepancies between data reported in the public domain and in CSRs. We used random-effects meta-analyses to evaluate the effect of ESAs on QoL measured with Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Anemia (FACT-An), FACT-Fatigue (FACT-F) and FACT-Anemia Total (FACT-An Total) stratified by data source and the impact of discrepancies on QoL, mortality, adverse events, and clinical effectiveness outcomes. We identified 94 eligible RCTs; CSRs or other study documentation were available for 17 (18%) RCTs at EMA. Median report length was 1,825 pages (range 72–14,569). Of 180 outcomes of interest reported in the EMA documentation, 127 (71%) were publicly available. For 80 of those (63%) we noted discrepancies, but these had little impact on the pooled effect estimates. Of 27 QoL outcomes reported in the CSRs, 17 (63%) were unpublished. Including six unpublished comparisons (pooled mean difference [MD] 0.20; 95% confidence interval [CI] -1.93, 2.33) reduced the pooled effect of ESAs for FACT-An from MD 5.51 (95% CI 4.20, 6.82) in published data to MD 3.21 (95% CI 1.38, 5.03), which is below a clinically important difference (defined as MD ≥4). Effects were similar for FACT-F and FACT-An Total. Access to CSRs from EMA reduced reporting biases for QoL outcomes. However, EMA received documentation for a fraction of all RCTs on effects of ESAs in cancer patients. Additional efforts by other agencies and institutions are needed to make CSRs universally available for all RCTs.
机译:自2010年以来,欧洲药品管理局(EMA)提供了访问临床研究报告(CSR)的权限。我们要求CSR用于EMA癌症患者的红细胞生成刺激剂(ESA)的随机对照试验(RCT),并通过文献检索确定了RCT出版物。我们评估了CSR的可用性和完整性,从CSR获得的未报告和未发表的数据对ESA对癌症患者的生活质量(QoL)的影响以及在公共领域和CSR中报告的数据之间的差异。我们使用随机效应荟萃分析评估ESA对QoL的影响,并通过癌症治疗性贫血(FACT-An),FACT-疲劳(FACT-F)和FACT-Anemia Total(FACT-An Total)的功能评估来衡量根据数据来源和差异对QoL,死亡率,不良事件和临床效果结果的影响进行分层。我们确定了94个符合条件的RCT; EMA提供了17个(18%)RCT的CSR或其他研究文档。报告中位数为1,825页(范围72–14,569)。在EMA文档中报告的180个感兴趣的结果中,有127个(71%)是公开可用的。对于其中的80个(63%),我们注意到差异,但这些差异对汇总效应估计影响很小。在企业社会责任报告的27个QoL结果中,有17个(63%)尚未发表。包括6个未发布的比较(合并平均差[MD] 0.20; 95%置信区间[CI] -1.93,2.33),将FACT-An的ESA汇总影响从MD 5.51(95%CI 4.20,6.82)减少到MD 3.21(95%CI 1.38,5.03),低于临床上的重要差异(定义为MD≥4)。 FACT-F和FACT-An Total的效果相似。从EMA获得CSR的机会减少了QoL结果的报告偏见。但是,EMA收到了所有有关癌症患者ESA疗效的RCT的一部分记录。为了使所有RCT都能普遍获得CSR,需要其他机构和机构的进一步努力。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号