corner
Healthy Skepticism
Join us to help reduce harm from misleading health information.
Increase font size   Decrease font size   Print-friendly view   Print
Register Log in

Healthy Skepticism Library item: 14389

Warning: This library includes all items relevant to health product marketing that we are aware of regardless of quality. Often we do not agree with all or part of the contents.

 

Publication type: news

Many Trial Reports on FDA-Approved Drugs Go Unpublished
The Washington Post 2008 Sep 23
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/23/AR2008092300627.html


Full text:

More than half of all supporting clinical trials for U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approved drugs remain unpublished five years after permission has been given to sell the drugs in the United States, say University of California, San Francisco researchers.

They combed the medical literature to determine the publication status of all 909 clinical trials that supported the 90 new drug applications approved by the FDA between 1998 and 2000.

They found that 76 percent of pivotal trials — such as large Phase II and Phase III trials designed to determine the overall risks and benefits of a drug — had been published in medical journals, usually within three years of FDA approval of the drug. However, only 43 percent of all supporting trials submitted to the FDA had been published.

The UCSF team also found evidence of selective reporting of the results from these trials. For example, a pivotal trial in which a new drug outperforms an old drug is more likely to be published than a trial showing a new drug is no better than an old one.

This type of publication bias may lead to an inaccurately favorable record in the medical literature of a drug’s performance compared to similar drugs. That can cause physicians to favor newer and more expensive drugs, the researchers explained.

They said their study findings, published in the journalPLoS Medicine, provide a baseline for monitoring the impact of the FDA Amendments Act 2007. It was introduced to improve the accuracy and completeness of drug trial reporting.

The act requires that all trials supporting FDA-approved drugs be registered when they start and that all outcomes must be posted within a year of drug approval on the U.S. National Institutes of Health’s clinical trials Web site.

 

  Healthy Skepticism on RSS   Healthy Skepticism on Facebook   Healthy Skepticism on Twitter

Please
Click to Register

(read more)

then
Click to Log in
for free access to more features of this website.

Forgot your username or password?

You are invited to
apply for membership
of Healthy Skepticism,
if you support our aims.

Pay a subscription

Support our work with a donation

Buy Healthy Skepticism T Shirts


If there is something you don't like, please tell us. If you like our work, please tell others.

Email a Friend








...to influence multinational corporations effectively, the efforts of governments will have to be complemented by others, notably the many voluntary organisations that have shown they can effectively represent society’s public-health interests…
A small group known as Healthy Skepticism; formerly the Medical Lobby for Appropriate Marketing) has consistently and insistently drawn the attention of producers to promotional malpractice, calling for (and often securing) correction. These organisations [Healthy Skepticism, Médecins Sans Frontières and Health Action International] are small, but they are capable; they bear malice towards no one, and they are inscrutably honest. If industry is indeed persuaded to face up to its social responsibilities in the coming years it may well be because of these associations and others like them.
- Dukes MN. Accountability of the pharmaceutical industry. Lancet. 2002 Nov 23; 360(9346)1682-4.