AllTrials

Last updated
AllTrials-logo.png

AllTrials (sometimes called All Trials or AllTrials.net) is a project advocating that clinical research adopt the principles of open research. The project summarizes itself as "All trials registered, all results reported": that is, all clinical trials should be listed in a clinical trials registry, and their results should always be shared as open data.

Contents

At the center of the organisation is a petition signed by over 85,000 individuals and 599 organisations (as of August 2015):

Thousands of clinical trials have not reported their results; some have not even been registered.

Information on what was done and what was found in these trials could be lost forever to doctors and researchers, leading to bad treatment decisions, missed opportunities for good medicine, and trials being repeated.

All trials past and present should be registered, and the full methods and the results reported.

We call on governments, regulators and research bodies to implement measures to achieve this.

Ben Goldacre, author of Bad Science and Bad Pharma , is a founder of the campaign and its most public spokesperson. In 2016, he participated in the launch of the OpenTrials database. [1]

AllTrials is an international initiative of Bad Science, BMJ , Centre for Evidence-based Medicine, Cochrane Collaboration, James Lind Initiative, PLOS and Sense about Science and is being led in the US by Sense about Science USA, Dartmouth's Geisel School of Medicine and the Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy & Clinical Practice. [2]

Issues addressed

The project is a reaction to under-reporting of research. [3] [4] [5] [6]

A substantial proportion (estimates range from one-third to one-half) of medical research goes unpublished. [7] It has also been shown that negative findings are less likely to be published than positive ones, even in the absence of conflicts of interest.[ citation needed ]

Much medical research is done by the pharmaceutical industry, which have a conflict of interest reporting results which may hurt sales of their products. [8] There is a measurable funding bias in reporting; studies have shown that published drug studies funded by pharmaceutical companies are much more likely to support the use of the tested drug than studies with other funding. Industry-funded trials are also less likely to be published. [7] [9]

If the statistical methods used to analyse the trial are not chosen before the study it started, there is a danger that researchers will intentionally or unintentionally pick the method that gives the results they expect, or which gives the most significant results. This makes the analysis statistically invalid .

Not publishing trials which fail to find a clear effect exposes trial volunteers to pointless risk [10] and wastes research effort (as the same trial is repeated over and over). It also biases the medical literature, making it report effects where none exist (since, given enough trials, eventually one will find a difference by pure chance). [11]

Pre-trial registration makes non-publication and changes in analysis methods obvious to medical reviewers. It also enables authors of meta-studies to track down and analyse missing data. Finally, it lets doctors and patients know when a trial is looking for volunteers. [10]

There are other sources of bias, such as the conditions sometimes attached to funding by funding agencies with a financial interest in the trial's outcome. Medical researchers may be asked to agree to allow the funding agency to censor results. Some funding agencies may also refuse to give the medical researcher access to the raw data, giving them only the finished analysis, or even a draft paper, and asking them to put their name to it. This is not acceptable academic practice, and some academic journals require that authors sign a statement that they have not entered into such agreements. [8] [9]

Ben Goldacre, a physician and spokesperson for the campaign, would like to address the systematic flaws in clinical research which cause data to be lost after it is gathered. [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18]

Coverage

The campaign has been widely covered, and supported, in the academic press. The British Medical Journal and PLOS are founding members. Nature [19] and The Lancet [20] both published supportive articles in January 2014.

There has also been mainstream media coverage. [21]

Controversy

There has been criticism from the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), with senior vice-president Matt Bennett saying that trial data disclosure measures which AllTrials has recommended to the European Medicines Agency "could risk patient privacy, lead to fewer clinical trials, and result in fewer new medicines to meet patient needs and improve health.". [22]

AllTrials have published a detailed statement [23] of exactly what they want to see published, which states "The AllTrials campaign is not calling for individual patient data to be made publicly available".

A 2012 editorial published by senior regulators from the European Medicines agency [24] largely agreed with AllTrials, saying "We consider it neither desirable nor realistic to maintain the status quo of limited availability of regulatory trials data". They were also of the opinion that adequate standards for protection of personal data could be written. However, they warned that third party reanalysis was neither a guarantee of quality nor of lack of conflict of interest, which, in the worst case, could lead to negative public health consequences.[ citation needed ]

They suggested that reanalyses should therefore be subject to the same regulations as sponsor analyses, such as registering analysis plans. They argued against completely unrestricted access to data, but in favor of broader access. [24] AllTrials is not calling for completely unrestricted access to raw data, [23] so the scope of disagreements is limited to what restrictions should be in place.

Supporters

The campaign is an initiative of Sense about Science, [25] Centre for Evidence Based Medicine, The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, [26] James Lind Alliance, Cochrane Collaboration, [27] [28] BMJ Group, PLOS, [29] and Bad Science. The petition statement of AllTrials has been signed by organizations including Wellcome Trust, [30] British Library, Medical Research Council (UK), British Heart Foundation, Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, BioMed Central, [31] National Physicians Alliance, Royal Society of Medicine, Health Research Authority, American Medical Student Association, GlaxoSmithKline, [32] and others.

As of May 2017, The AllTrials petition has been signed by 90,282 people and 721 organisations. [33] In October 2016, AllTrials published a road map detailing steps that various types of organisations can take to get more trials registered and more results reported. [34]

85 investors with >€3.5 trillion (£2.45trn; $3.83trn) of investments have supported AllTrials (as of July 2015), with Peter van der Werf of RobecoSAM saying: "We deem this to be a financially material factor and encourage all companies to gain credibility regarding their approach to clinical trial transparency by signing up to the AllTrials principles.". [35] The Laura and John Arnold Foundation provided early and ongoing financial support. [36]

The original policy of the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations required that funded parties pre-register any trials in a clinical trials registry, publish results within a year of study completion (except with compelling reason and permission of CEPI), publish results in open-access articles, and have mechanisms for securely sharing underlying data and results, including negative results, in a way that preserves trial volunteer privacy. In May 2018 the CEPI proposed changing the policy to remove these provisions. [37] The policy was changed by the CEPI in December 2018. [38] [39]

Opponents

The European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations and Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America have expressed interest in lobbying against the campaign. [40] Campaign supporters criticized Hoffmann-La Roche's plans to be more open but not to the extent requested by AllTrials. [41] [42]

See also

Related Research Articles

Evidence-based medicine (EBM) is "the conscientious, explicit and judicious use of current best evidence in making decisions about the care of individual patients. ... [It] means integrating individual clinical expertise with the best available external clinical evidence from systematic research." The aim of EBM is to integrate the experience of the clinician, the values of the patient, and the best available scientific information to guide decision-making about clinical management. The term was originally used to describe an approach to teaching the practice of medicine and improving decisions by individual physicians about individual patients.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Randomized controlled trial</span> Form of scientific experiment

A randomized controlled trial is a form of scientific experiment used to control factors not under direct experimental control. Examples of RCTs are clinical trials that compare the effects of drugs, surgical techniques, medical devices, diagnostic procedures, diets or other medical treatments.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Cochrane (organisation)</span> British nonprofit for reviews of medical research (formed 1993)

Cochrane is a British international charitable organisation formed to synthesize medical research findings to facilitate evidence-based choices about health interventions involving health professionals, patients and policy makers. It includes 53 review groups that are based at research institutions worldwide. Cochrane has over 37,000 volunteer experts from around the world.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Clinical trial</span> Phase of clinical research in medicine

Clinical trials are prospective biomedical or behavioral research studies on human participants designed to answer specific questions about biomedical or behavioral interventions, including new treatments and known interventions that warrant further study and comparison. Clinical trials generate data on dosage, safety and efficacy. They are conducted only after they have received health authority/ethics committee approval in the country where approval of the therapy is sought. These authorities are responsible for vetting the risk/benefit ratio of the trial—their approval does not mean the therapy is 'safe' or effective, only that the trial may be conducted.

In published academic research, publication bias occurs when the outcome of an experiment or research study biases the decision to publish or otherwise distribute it. Publishing only results that show a significant finding disturbs the balance of findings in favor of positive results. The study of publication bias is an important topic in metascience.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Pharmaceutical industry</span> Industry involved with discovery, development, production and marketing of drugs

The pharmaceutical industry is an industry involved in medicine that discovers, develops, produces, and markets pharmaceutical goods for use as drugs that function by being administered to patients using such medications with the goal of curing and/or preventing disease. Pharmaceutical companies may deal in "generic" medications and medical devices without the involvement of intellectual property, in "brand" materials specifically tied to a given company's history, or in both within different contexts. The industry's various subdivisions are all subject to a variety of laws and regulations that govern entire financial processes including the patenting, efficacy testing, safety evaluation, and marketing of these drugs. The global pharmaceuticals market produced treatments worth $1,228.45 billion in 2020, in total, and this showed a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 1.8% given the results of recent events.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Rosiglitazone</span> Chemical compound

Rosiglitazone is an antidiabetic drug in the thiazolidinedione class. It works as an insulin sensitizer, by binding to the PPAR in fat cells and making the cells more responsive to insulin. It is marketed by the pharmaceutical company GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) as a stand-alone drug or for use in combination with metformin or with glimepiride. First released in 1999, annual sales peaked at approximately $2.5-billion in 2006; however, following a meta-analysis in 2007 that linked the drug's use to an increased risk of heart attack, sales plummeted to just $9.5-million in 2012. The drug's patent expired in 2012.

The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) is an executive agency of the Department of Health and Social Care in the United Kingdom which is responsible for ensuring that medicines and medical devices work and are acceptably safe.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ben Goldacre</span> British physician, academic and science writer (born 1974)

Ben Michael Goldacre is a British physician, academic and science writer. He is the first Bennett Professor of Evidence-Based Medicine and director of the Bennett Institute for Applied Data Science at the University of Oxford. He is a founder of the AllTrials campaign and OpenTrials, aiming to require open science practices in clinical trials.

An adverse event (AE) is any untoward medical occurrence in a patient or clinical investigation subject administered a pharmaceutical product and which does not necessarily have a causal relationship with this treatment. An adverse event can therefore be any unfavourable and unintended sign, symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a medicinal (investigational) product, whether or not related to the medicinal (investigational) product.

Good clinical practice (GCP) is an international quality standard, which governments can then transpose into regulations for clinical trials involving human subjects. GCP follows the International Council for Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Pharmaceuticals for Human Use (ICH), and enforces tight guidelines on ethical aspects of clinical research.

<i>PLOS Medicine</i> Academic journal

PLOS Medicine is a peer-reviewed weekly medical journal covering the full spectrum of the medical sciences. It began operation on October 19, 2004, as the second journal of the Public Library of Science (PLOS), a non-profit open access publisher. All content in PLOS Medicine is published under the Creative Commons "by-attribution" license. To fund the journal, the publication's business model requires in most cases that authors pay publication fees. The journal was published online and in a printed format until 2005 and is now only published online. The journal's acting chief editor is Clare Stone, who replaced the previous chief editor, Larry Peiperl, in 2018.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Systematic review</span> Comprehensive review of research literature using systematic methods

A systematic review is a scholarly synthesis of the evidence on a clearly presented topic using critical methods to identify, define and assess research on the topic. A systematic review extracts and interprets data from published studies on the topic, then analyzes, describes, critically appraises and summarizes interpretations into a refined evidence-based conclusion. For example, a systematic review of randomized controlled trials is a way of summarizing and implementing evidence-based medicine.

Peter Christian Gøtzsche is a Danish physician, medical researcher, and former leader of the Nordic Cochrane Center at Rigshospitalet in Copenhagen, Denmark. He is a co-founder of the Cochrane Collaboration and has written numerous reviews for the organization. His membership in Cochrane was terminated by its Governing Board of Trustees on 25 September 2018. During the COVID-19 pandemic, Gøtzsche was criticised for spreading disinformation about COVID-19 vaccines.

<i>Bad Science</i> (Goldacre book) 2008 book by Ben Goldacre

Bad Science is a book written by Ben Goldacre which criticises certain physicians and the media for a lack of critical thinking and misunderstanding of evidence and statistics which is detrimental to the public understanding of science. In Bad Science, Goldacre explains basic scientific principles to demonstrate the importance of robust research methods, experimental design, and analysis to make informed judgements and conclusions of evidence-based medicine. Bad Science is described as an engaging and inspirational book, written in simple language and occasional humour, to effectively explain academic concepts to the reader.

<i>Bad Pharma</i> 2012 book critical of the pharmaceutical industry

Bad Pharma: How Drug Companies Mislead Doctors and Harm Patients is a book by the British physician and academic Ben Goldacre about the pharmaceutical industry, its relationship with the medical profession, and the extent to which it controls academic research into its own products. It was published in the UK in September 2012 by the Fourth Estate imprint of HarperCollins, and in the United States in February 2013 by Faber and Faber.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Study 329</span> Scientific article

Study 329 was a clinical trial which was conducted in North America from 1994 to 1998 to study the efficacy of paroxetine, an SSRI anti-depressant, in treating 12- to 18-year-olds diagnosed with major depressive disorder. Led by Martin Keller, then professor of psychiatry at Brown University, and funded by the British pharmaceutical company SmithKline Beecham—known since 2000 as GlaxoSmithKline (GSK)—the study compared paroxetine with imipramine, a tricyclic antidepressant, and placebo. SmithKline Beecham had released paroxetine in 1991, marketing it as Paxil in North America and Seroxat in the UK. The drug attracted sales of $11.7 billion in the United States alone from 1997 to 2006, including $2.12 billion in 2002, the year before it lost its patent.

The Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine (CEBM), based in the Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences at the University of Oxford, is an academic-led centre dedicated to the practice, teaching, and dissemination of high quality evidence-based medicine to improve healthcare in everyday clinical practice. CEBM was founded by David Sackett in 1995. It was subsequently directed by Brian Haynes and Paul Glasziou. Since 2010 it has been led by Professor Carl Heneghan, a clinical epidemiologist and general practitioner.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Conflicts of interest in academic publishing</span>

Conflicts of interest (COIs) often arise in academic publishing. Such conflicts may cause wrongdoing and make it more likely. Ethical standards in academic publishing exist to avoid and deal with conflicts of interest, and the field continues to develop new standards. Standards vary between journals and are unevenly applied. According to the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, "[a]uthors have a responsibility to evaluate the integrity, history, practices and reputation of the journals to which they submit manuscripts".

Outcome switching is the practice of changing the primary or secondary outcomes of a clinical trial after its initiation. An outcome is the goal of the clinical trial, such as survival after five years for cancer treatment. Outcome switching can lead to bias and undermine the reliability of the trial, for instance when outcomes are switched after researchers already have access to trial data. That way, researchers can cherry pick an outcome which is statistically significant.

References

  1. ↑ "About". 1 December 2015.
  2. ↑ "All Trials Registered. All Results Reported". AllTrials. Retrieved 2015-11-17.
  3. ↑ Chalmers, I; Glasziou, P; Godlee, F (2013). "All trials must be registered and the results published" (PDF). BMJ. 346: f105. doi: 10.1136/bmj.f105 . PMID   23303893. S2CID   40236020.
  4. ↑ Bell, Alice (8 February 2013). "All Trials: working with the public to reform science". theguardian.com. Retrieved 26 October 2013.
  5. ↑ Glasziou, Paul (15 January 2013). "Register all trials, report all results – it's long overdue". The Conversation . Retrieved 26 October 2013.
  6. ↑ Cressey, Daniel (2013). "Secrets of trial data revealed". Nature. 502 (7470): 154–5. Bibcode:2013Natur.502..154C. doi: 10.1038/502154a . PMID   24108030.
  7. 1 2 Jones, C. W; Handler, L; Crowell, K. E; Keil, L. G; Weaver, M. A; Platts-Mills, T. F (2013). "Non-publication of large randomized clinical trials: Cross sectional analysis". BMJ. 347: f6104. doi:10.1136/bmj.f6104. PMC   3812466 . PMID   24169943.
  8. 1 2 Davidoff, F; Deangelis, C. D; Drazen, J. M; Nicholls, M. G; Hoey, J; Højgaard, L; Horton, R; Kotzin, S; Nylenna, M; Overbeke, A. J; Sox, H. C; Van Der Weyden, M. B; Wilkes, M. S (2001). "Sponsorship, Authorship, and Accountability". New England Journal of Medicine. 345 (11): 825–6, discussion 826–7. doi:10.1056/NEJMed010093. PMC   81460 . PMID   11556304.
  9. 1 2 Whoriskey, Peter (24 November 2012). "As drug industry's influence over research grows, so does the potential for bias" – via www.washingtonpost.com.
  10. 1 2 Dickersin, Kay; Rennie, D (2003). "Registering Clinical Trials". JAMA. 290 (4): 516–23. doi:10.1001/jama.290.4.516. PMID   12876095.
  11. ↑ Sterling, Theodore D (1959). "Publication Decisions and their Possible Effects on Inferences Drawn from Tests of Significance—or Vice Versa". Journal of the American Statistical Association. 54 (285): 30–4. doi:10.1080/01621459.1959.10501497. JSTOR   2282137.
  12. ↑ Fiore, Kristina (23 February 2013). "Is Evidence-Based Medicine Only an Illusion?". MedPage Today . Retrieved 26 October 2013.
  13. ↑ Buch, Prateek (10 January 2013). "Opinion: AllTrials.net – a crucial campaign on data transparency that will save lives". Liberal Democrat Voice . Retrieved 26 October 2013.
  14. ↑ Biome staff (20 May 2013). "Ben Goldacre on Clinical Trials". biomedcentral.com. Archived from the original on 2013-10-29. Retrieved 26 October 2013.
  15. ↑ Goldacre, Ben (1 February 2013). "Health Care's Trick Coin". The New York Times . New York. ISSN   0362-4331 . Retrieved 26 October 2013.
  16. ↑ Doyle, Kathryn (14 March 2013). "Surgery clinical trial results selectively reported". Chicago Tribune . Retrieved 26 October 2013.
  17. ↑ Olijnyk, Zena (22 Feb 2013). "Bad Pharma's bitter pill to swallow". m.bnn.ca. Business News Network . Retrieved 26 October 2013.
  18. ↑ Stugess, Kylie (27 February 2013). "Bad Pharma – Interview with Ben Goldacre". Skeptical Inquirer . Committee for Skeptical Inquiry . Retrieved 26 October 2013.
  19. ↑ "Data sharing will pay dividends". Nature. 505 (7482): 131. 2014. doi: 10.1038/505131a . PMID   24409508.
  20. ↑ Glasziou, Paul; Altman, Douglas G; Bossuyt, Patrick; Boutron, Isabelle; Clarke, Mike; Julious, Steven; Michie, Susan; Moher, David; Wager, Elizabeth (2014). "Reducing waste from incomplete or unusable reports of biomedical research". The Lancet. 383 (9913): 267–76. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(13)62228-X. PMID   24411647. S2CID   28924552.
  21. ↑ The Editorial Board (4 July 2013). "Opinion - Full Disclosure Needed for Clinical Drug Data". The New York Times.
  22. ↑ Sample, Ian (21 July 2013). "Big pharma mobilising patients in battle over drugs trials data". the Guardian.
  23. 1 2 "All trials registered and results reported".
  24. 1 2 Eichler, Hans-Georg; Abadie, Eric; Breckenridge, Alasdair; Leufkens, Hubert; Rasi, Guido (2012). "Open Clinical Trial Data for All? A View from Regulators". PLOS Medicine. 9 (4): e1001202. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001202 . PMC   3323505 . PMID   22505851.
  25. ↑ Sense about Science (9 January 2013). "AllTrials campaign launch". senseaboutscience.org. Archived from the original on 2013-10-29. Retrieved 26 October 2013.
  26. ↑ "AllTrials campaign launched in US: Dartmouth's Geisel School of Medicine to lead the US campaign for all clinical trials to be registered and results reported". The Dartmouth Institute (Press release). 2013. Retrieved 26 October 2013.
  27. ↑ Cochrane Collaboration (2013). "Cochrane signs up to AllTrials initiative to campaign for registration and reporting of all clinical trials". cochrane.org. Retrieved 26 October 2013.
  28. ↑ Brown, Tracy (30 April 2013). "Editorial : It's time for AllTrials registered and reported". thecochranelibrary.com. Archived from the original on 29 October 2013. Retrieved 26 October 2013.
  29. ↑ Barbour, Virginia (18 January 2013). "Getting serious about registering and reporting trials". blogs.plos.org. Retrieved 26 October 2013.
  30. ↑ Wellcome Trust (16 September 2013). "House of Commons - Science and Technology Committee: Written evidence submitted by the Wellcome Trust". publications.parliament.uk. Retrieved 26 October 2013.
  31. ↑ BioMed Central (12 August 2013). "A Call to Action from AllTrials". blogs.biomedcentral.com. Archived from the original on 2013-10-29. Retrieved 26 October 2013.
  32. ↑ GlaxoSmithKline (5 February 2013). "GSK announces support for AllTrials campaign for clinical data transparency". gsk.com. Archived from the original on 2013-10-29. Retrieved 26 October 2013.
  33. ↑ "All Trials Registered. All Results Reported". AllTrials. Retrieved 2015-11-17.
  34. ↑ AllTrials campaign. 2017. Alltrials Roadmap http://www.alltrials.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/AllTrials-Roadmap.pdf
  35. ↑ Hawkes, Nigel (2015). "Investment managers back greater transparency of clinical trials". BMJ. 351: h4002. doi:10.1136/bmj.h4002. PMID   26207007. S2CID   38566459.
  36. ↑ Apple, Sam (January 22, 2017). "The Young Billionaire Behind the War on Bad Science". Wired.
  37. ↑ "MSF's response to CEPI's policy regarding equitable access". Médecins Sans Frontières Access Campaign. 25 September 2018.
  38. ↑ "Open letter to CEPI Board Members: Revise CEPI's access policy". Médecins Sans Frontières Access Campaign. 5 March 2019.
  39. ↑ Gerald Posner (2 March 2020). "Big Pharma May Pose an Obstacle to Vaccine Development". The New York Times . Retrieved 8 March 2020. Drug companies on CEPI's scientific advisory panel, including Johnson & Johnson, Pfizer, and Japan's Takeda, pushed back. CEPI mostly capitulated in a December 2018 two-page declaration in which it jettisoned specifics but gave lip service to its founding mission of "equitable access to these vaccines for affected populations during outbreaks."
  40. ↑ Sample, Ian (21 July 2013). "Big pharma mobilising patients in battle over drugs trials data". theguardian.com. Retrieved 26 October 2013.
  41. ↑ Hoffmann-La Roche (26 February 2013). "Roche launches new process for accessing clinical trial data". roche.com. Archived from the original on 2013-10-29. Retrieved 26 October 2013.
  42. ↑ Walsh, Fergus (26 February 2013). "Drug firm Roche pledges greater access to trials data". bbc.co.uk. Retrieved 26 October 2013.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.