Cargando…

FDAAA legislation is working, but methodological flaws undermine the reliability of clinical trials: a cross-sectional study

The relationship between clinical research and the pharmaceutical industry has placed clinical trials in jeopardy. According to the medical literature, more than 70% of clinical trials are industry-funded. Many of these trials remain unpublished or have methodological flaws that distort their result...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Marin dos Santos, Douglas H., Atallah, Álvaro N.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: PeerJ Inc. 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4485238/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26131374
http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.1015
_version_ 1782378756277534720
author Marin dos Santos, Douglas H.
Atallah, Álvaro N.
author_facet Marin dos Santos, Douglas H.
Atallah, Álvaro N.
author_sort Marin dos Santos, Douglas H.
collection PubMed
description The relationship between clinical research and the pharmaceutical industry has placed clinical trials in jeopardy. According to the medical literature, more than 70% of clinical trials are industry-funded. Many of these trials remain unpublished or have methodological flaws that distort their results. In 2007, it was signed into law the Food and Drug Administration Amendments Act (FDAAA), aiming to provide publicly access to a broad range of biomedical information to be made available on the platform ClinicalTrials (available at https://www.clinicaltrials.gov). We accessed ClinicalTrials.gov and evaluated the compliance of researchers and sponsors with the FDAAA. Our sample comprised 243 protocols of clinical trials of biological monoclonal antibodies (mAb) adalimumab, bevacizumab, infliximab, rituximab, and trastuzumab. We demonstrate that the new legislation has positively affected transparency patterns in clinical research, through a significant increase in publication and online reporting rates after the enactment of the law. Poorly designed trials, however, remain a challenge to be overcome, due to a high prevalence of methodological flaws. These flaws affect the quality of clinical information available, breaching ethical duties of sponsors and researchers, as well as the human right to health.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4485238
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher PeerJ Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-44852382015-06-30 FDAAA legislation is working, but methodological flaws undermine the reliability of clinical trials: a cross-sectional study Marin dos Santos, Douglas H. Atallah, Álvaro N. PeerJ Clinical Trials The relationship between clinical research and the pharmaceutical industry has placed clinical trials in jeopardy. According to the medical literature, more than 70% of clinical trials are industry-funded. Many of these trials remain unpublished or have methodological flaws that distort their results. In 2007, it was signed into law the Food and Drug Administration Amendments Act (FDAAA), aiming to provide publicly access to a broad range of biomedical information to be made available on the platform ClinicalTrials (available at https://www.clinicaltrials.gov). We accessed ClinicalTrials.gov and evaluated the compliance of researchers and sponsors with the FDAAA. Our sample comprised 243 protocols of clinical trials of biological monoclonal antibodies (mAb) adalimumab, bevacizumab, infliximab, rituximab, and trastuzumab. We demonstrate that the new legislation has positively affected transparency patterns in clinical research, through a significant increase in publication and online reporting rates after the enactment of the law. Poorly designed trials, however, remain a challenge to be overcome, due to a high prevalence of methodological flaws. These flaws affect the quality of clinical information available, breaching ethical duties of sponsors and researchers, as well as the human right to health. PeerJ Inc. 2015-06-25 /pmc/articles/PMC4485238/ /pubmed/26131374 http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.1015 Text en © 2015 Marin dos Santos and Atallah http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Clinical Trials
Marin dos Santos, Douglas H.
Atallah, Álvaro N.
FDAAA legislation is working, but methodological flaws undermine the reliability of clinical trials: a cross-sectional study
title FDAAA legislation is working, but methodological flaws undermine the reliability of clinical trials: a cross-sectional study
title_full FDAAA legislation is working, but methodological flaws undermine the reliability of clinical trials: a cross-sectional study
title_fullStr FDAAA legislation is working, but methodological flaws undermine the reliability of clinical trials: a cross-sectional study
title_full_unstemmed FDAAA legislation is working, but methodological flaws undermine the reliability of clinical trials: a cross-sectional study
title_short FDAAA legislation is working, but methodological flaws undermine the reliability of clinical trials: a cross-sectional study
title_sort fdaaa legislation is working, but methodological flaws undermine the reliability of clinical trials: a cross-sectional study
topic Clinical Trials
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4485238/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26131374
http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.1015
work_keys_str_mv AT marindossantosdouglash fdaaalegislationisworkingbutmethodologicalflawsunderminethereliabilityofclinicaltrialsacrosssectionalstudy
AT atallahalvaron fdaaalegislationisworkingbutmethodologicalflawsunderminethereliabilityofclinicaltrialsacrosssectionalstudy