Clinical Review

Influence of study sponsorship on head and neck cancer randomized trial results^†,^‡

Corresponding Author

Gordon H. Sun MD

Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Clinical Scholars, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan

VA Center for Clinical Management Research, VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, Michigan

Department of Otolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan

6312 Medical Science Building I, 1150 W. Medical Center Drive, SPC 5604, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-5604. E-mail: [email protected]Search for more papers by this author

Jeffrey J. Houlton MD,

Jeffrey J. Houlton MD

Department of Otolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio

Search for more papers by this author

Mark P. MacEachern MLIS,

Mark P. MacEachern MLIS

A. Alfred Taubman Health Sciences Library, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan

Search for more papers by this author

Carol R. Bradford MD,

Carol R. Bradford MD

Department of Otolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan

Search for more papers by this author

Rodney A. Hayward MD,

Rodney A. Hayward MD

Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Clinical Scholars, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan

VA Center for Clinical Management Research, VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, Michigan

Search for more papers by this author

Gordon H. Sun MD,

Corresponding Author

Gordon H. Sun MD

Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Clinical Scholars, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan

VA Center for Clinical Management Research, VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, Michigan

Department of Otolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan

6312 Medical Science Building I, 1150 W. Medical Center Drive, SPC 5604, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-5604. E-mail: [email protected]Search for more papers by this author

Jeffrey J. Houlton MD,

Jeffrey J. Houlton MD

Department of Otolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio

Search for more papers by this author

Mark P. MacEachern MLIS,

Mark P. MacEachern MLIS

A. Alfred Taubman Health Sciences Library, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan

Search for more papers by this author

Carol R. Bradford MD,

Carol R. Bradford MD

Department of Otolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan

Search for more papers by this author

Rodney A. Hayward MD,

Rodney A. Hayward MD

Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Clinical Scholars, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan

VA Center for Clinical Management Research, VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, Michigan

Search for more papers by this author

First published: 18 September 2012

https://doi.org/10.1002/hed.23151

Citations: 14

^†

Conflict of interest disclosures: Dr. Gordon Sun is a Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Clinical Scholar. The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and the Department of Veterans Affairs were not directly involved in study design, data acquisition and interpretation, or manuscript preparation or review. Any opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation or the Department of Veterans Affairs.

^‡

This work was presented in part at the 8th International Conference on Head and Neck Cancer in Toronto, Canada, July 24, 2012.

Share a link

Email
Wechat
Bluesky

Abstract

Background

The 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).

Methods

We 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.

Results

Of 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).

Conclusions

Government-supported, but not industry-supported, RCTs were significantly associated with positive study results. These findings may be confounded by broadly applied definitions of sponsorship. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Head Neck 35: 1515–1520, 2013

REFERENCES

1Bodenheimer T. Uneasy alliance–clinical investigators and the pharmaceutical industry. N Engl J Med 2000; 342: 1539–1544.
10.1056/NEJM200005183422024
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
2Dorsey ER, de Roulet J, Thompson JP, et al. Funding of US biomedical research, 2003–2008. JAMA 2010; 303: 137–143.
10.1001/jama.2009.1987
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
3Als–Nielsen B, Chen W, Gluud C, Kjaergard LL. Association of funding and conclusions in randomized drug trials: a reflection of treatment effect or adverse events? JAMA 2003; 290: 921–928.
10.1001/jama.290.7.921
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
4Bhandari M, Busse JW, Jackowski D, et al. Association between industry funding and statistically significant pro-industry findings in medical and surgical randomized trials. CMAJ 2004; 170: 477–480.
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
5Davidson RA. Source of funding and outcome of clinical trials. J Gen Intern Med 1986; 1: 155–158.
10.1007/BF02602327
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
6J⊘rgensen AW, Maric KL, Tendal B, Faurschou A, G⊘tzsche PC. Industry-supported meta-analyses compared with meta-analyses with non-profit or no support: differences in methodological quality and conclusions. BMC Med Res Methodol 2008; 8: 60.
10.1186/1471-2288-8-60
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
7Chan AW, Krleza–Jerić K, Schmid I, Altman DG. Outcome reporting bias in randomized trials funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. CMAJ 2004; 171: 735–740.
10.1503/cmaj.1041086
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
8Jefferson T, Di Pietrantonj C, Debalini MG, Rivetti A, Demicheli V. Relation of study quality, concordance, take home message, funding, and impact in studies of influenza vaccines: systematic review. BMJ 2009; 338: b354.
10.1136/bmj.b354
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
9Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, et al. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trials 1996; 17: 1–12.
10.1016/0197-2456(95)00134-4
CAS PubMed Google Scholar
10Djulbegovic B, Lacevic M, Cantor A, et al. The uncertainty principle and industry-sponsored research. Lancet 2000; 356: 635–638.
10.1016/S0140-6736(00)02605-2
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
11Clifford TJ, Barrowman NJ, Moher D. Funding source, trial outcome and reporting quality: are they related? Results of a pilot study. BMC Health Serv Res 2002; 2: 18.
10.1186/1472-6963-2-18
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
12Lundh A, Barbateskovic M, Hróbjartsson A, G⊘tzsche PC. Conflicts of interest at medical journals: the influence of industry-supported randomised trials on journal impact factors and revenue—cohort study. PLoS Med 2010; 7: e1000354.
10.1371/journal.pmed.1000354
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
13Bekelman JE, Li Y, Gross CP. Scope and impact of financial conflicts of interest in biomedical research: a systematic review. JAMA 2003; 289: 454–465.
10.1001/jama.289.4.454
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
14Booth CM, Cescon DW, Wang L, Tannock IF, Krzyzanowska MK. Evolution of the randomized controlled trial in oncology over three decades. J Clin Oncol 2008; 26: 5458–5464.
10.1200/JCO.2008.16.5456
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
15Friedberg M, Saffran B, Stinson TJ, Nelson W, Bennett CL. Evaluation of conflict of interest in economic analyses of new drugs used in oncology. JAMA 1999; 282: 1453–1457.
10.1001/jama.282.15.1453
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
16Knox KS, Adams JR, Djulbegovic B, Stinson TJ, Tomor C, Bennet CL. Reporting and dissemination of industry versus non-profit sponsored economic analyses of six novel drugs used in oncology. Ann Oncol 2000; 11: 1591–1595.
10.1023/A:1008309817708
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
17Moja PL, Moschetti I, D'Amico R. Outcome reporting bias in government-funded RCTs. CMAJ 2005; 172: 857; author reply 857.
10.1503/cmaj.1041669
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
18Angell M, Utiger RD, Wood AJ. Disclosure of authors' conflicts of interest: a follow-up. N Engl J Med 2000; 342: 586–587.
10.1056/NEJM200002243420812
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
19Krimsky S, Rothenberg LS. Conflict of interest policies in science and medical journals: editorial practices and author disclosures. Sci Eng Ethics 2001; 7: 205–218.
10.1007/s11948-001-0041-7
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
20Franzoni C, Scellato G, Stephan P. Science policy. Changing incentives to publish. Science 2011; 333: 702–703.
10.1126/science.1197286
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
21Glickman SW, McHutchison JG, Peterson ED, et al. Ethical and scientific implications of the globalization of clinical research. N Engl J Med 2009; 360: 816–823.
10.1056/NEJMsb0803929
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
22McGeary M, Burstein M. Sources of cancer research funding in the United States. Available at: http://iom.edu/∼/media/Files/Activity%20Files/Disease/NCPF/Fund.pdf. Accessed June 19, 2012.
Google Scholar
23 [No authors listed] A cure for cancer research. Nat Med 2010; 16: 829.
10.1038/nm0810-829
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
24Jagsi R, Sheets N, Jankovic A, Motomura AR, Amarnath S, Ubel PA. Frequency, nature, effects, and correlates of conflicts of interest in published clinical cancer research. Cancer 2009; 115: 2783–2791.
10.1002/cncr.24315
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
25Evans J. High risk NIH grants announced. Available at: http://classic.the-scientist.com/blog/display/55023/. Accessed June 19, 2012.
Google Scholar
26Levinsky NG. Nonfinancial conflicts of interest in research. N Engl J Med 2002; 347: 759–761.
10.1056/NEJMsb020853
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar

Citing Literature

Volume35, Issue10

October 2013

Pages 1515-1520

Influence of study sponsorship on head and neck cancer randomized trial results^†,^‡

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

REFERENCES

Citing Literature

References

Information

About Wiley Online Library

Help & Support

Opportunities

Connect with Wiley

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

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

REFERENCES

Citing Literature

References

Related

Information

Influence of study sponsorship on head and neck cancer randomized trial results^†,^‡