Influence of study sponsorship on head and neck cancer randomized trial results

被引:10
作者
Sun, Gordon H. [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Houlton, Jeffrey J. [4 ]
MacEachern, Mark P. [5 ]
Bradford, Carol R. [3 ]
Hayward, Rodney A. [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Michigan, Robert Wood Johnson Fdn Clin Scholars, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 USA
[2] VA Ann Arbor Healthcare Syst, VA Ctr Clin Management Res, Ann Arbor, MI USA
[3] Univ Michigan, Dept Otolaryngol Head & Neck Surg, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 USA
[4] Univ Cincinnati, Dept Otolaryngol Head & Neck Surg, Cincinnati, OH USA
[5] Univ Michigan, A Alfred Taubman Hlth Sci Lib, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 USA
来源
HEAD AND NECK-JOURNAL FOR THE SCIENCES AND SPECIALTIES OF THE HEAD AND NECK | 2013年 / 35卷 / 10期
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
head and neck neoplasms; conflict of interest; bias; bibliometric analysis; research sponsorship; CONFLICTS-OF-INTEREST; OUTCOME REPORTING BIAS; BIOMEDICAL-RESEARCH; ECONOMIC-ANALYSES; INDUSTRY; QUALITY; ASSOCIATION; NONPROFIT;
D O I
10.1002/hed.23151
中图分类号
R76 [耳鼻咽喉科学];
学科分类号
100213 ;
摘要
BackgroundThe purpose of this study was to identify associations between study sponsorship and the methodological quality and published outcomes of head and neck cancer randomized controlled trials (RCTs). MethodsWe systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for qualified RCTs, evaluating journal impact factor (IF), Jadad score (measure of study quality), and results favoring or not favoring experimental therapy. ResultsOf 118 RCTs, the most common sponsor was government (38; 32%), followed by nonprofit organizations (30; 25%) and industry (26; 22%). Industry-supported RCTs were associated with publication in journals with higher IF compared with RCTs without industry support (p = .013). Government-supported RCTs were associated with higher mean Jadad score (p = .026) and results favoring experimental therapy (p = .034). ConclusionsGovernment-supported, but not industry-supported, RCTs were significantly associated with positive study results. These findings may be confounded by broadly applied definitions of sponsorship. (c) 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Head Neck 35: 1515-1520, 2013
引用
收藏
页码:1515 / 1520
页数:6
相关论文
共 26 条
[1]   Association of funding and conclusions in randomized drug trials - A reflection of treatment effect or adverse events? [J].
Als-Nielsen, B ;
Chen, WD ;
Gluud, C ;
Kjaergard, LL .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2003, 290 (07) :921-928
[2]   Disclosure of authors' conflicts of interest: A follow-up. [J].
Angell, M ;
Utiger, RD ;
Wood, AJJ .
NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2000, 342 (08) :586-587
[3]   A cure for cancer research [J].
不详 .
NATURE MEDICINE, 2010, 16 (08) :829-829
[4]   Scope and impact of financial conflicts of interest in biomedical research - A systematic review [J].
Bekelman, JE ;
Li, Y ;
Gross, CP .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2003, 289 (04) :454-465
[5]  
Bhandari M, 2004, CAN MED ASSOC J, V170, P477
[6]   Uneasy alliance - Clinical investigators and the pharmaceutical industry [J].
Bodenheimer, T .
NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2000, 342 (20) :1539-1544
[7]   Evolution of the Randomized Controlled Trial in Oncology Over Three Decades [J].
Booth, Christopher M. ;
Cescon, David W. ;
Wang, Lisa ;
Tannock, Ian F. ;
Krzyzanowska, Monika K. .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2008, 26 (33) :5458-5464
[8]   Outcome reporting bias in randomized trials funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research [J].
Chan, AW ;
Krieza-Jeric, K ;
Schmid, I ;
Altman, DG .
CANADIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION JOURNAL, 2004, 171 (07) :735-740
[9]   Funding source, trial outcome and reporting quality: are they related? Results of a pilot study [J].
Clifford, TJ ;
Barrowman, NJ ;
Moher, D .
BMC HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH, 2002, 2 (1) :18
[10]   SOURCE OF FUNDING AND OUTCOME OF CLINICAL-TRIALS [J].
DAVIDSON, RA .
JOURNAL OF GENERAL INTERNAL MEDICINE, 1986, 1 (03) :155-158