Primary prevention of venous thromboembolism for cancer patients in randomized controlled trials: a bibliographical analysis of funding and trial characteristics

Résumé fourni par la source

Background The majority of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis in patients with cancer involve commercial sponsorship. Commercial sponsorship overcomes feasibility limitations inherent in RCTs, such as recruitment and funding, but has attracted scrutiny for its potential for bias. Objectives In RCTs of VTE prophylaxis in patients with cancer, how do trial characteristics compare between commercially sponsored RCTs and noncommercially sponsored RCTs? Methods Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for RCTs that investigated at least 1 pharmacologic intervention for VTE prophylaxis in adult patients with cancer. Screening and data extraction were conducted by independent reviewers. Outcomes included trial characteristics, reporting of favorable outcomes, protocol-manuscript discrepancies, and appraisal of spin. Outcomes were compared using the independent t -test, Mann–Whitney U-test, Pearson chi-squared test, and Fisher's exact test. Logistic regression was performed to identify factors associated with possible bias. Results Of the 54 trials analyzed, 34 (63%) reported commercial sponsorship. Commercial sponsorship was not associated with the reporting of favorable outcomes, presence of spin, retrospective registration, or protocol-manuscript discrepancy. Spin was most prevalent in the abstract conclusions (9 out of 17 [53.3%]) and manuscript conclusions (8 out of 17 [46.7%]). Commercially sponsored trials had a higher rate of intention-to-treat analysis. Noncommercially sponsored trials were more likely to report retrospective registration of trial protocol and the use of composite primary outcomes. Conclusion There were few significant differences between trial characteristics, suggesting that the evidence from commercially sponsored trials investigating VTE prophylaxis in patients with cancer is unlikely to be subject to bias attributable to commercial sponsorship.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.