Study: Cancer Trial Results - Slow To Be Published

Options
cp418
cp418 Member Posts: 7,079
edited June 2014 in Clinical Trials, Research News, Podcasts, and Study Results

Study: Cancer Medication Trial Results Often Slow To Be Published.

Reuters (7/26, Seaman) reports that research published online in the Journal of Clinical Oncology indicates that while the results of certain trials are required by US law to be published online within 12 months of the study’s completion, roughly half of the trials involving cancer medications remain unavailable after three years. Investigators came to this conclusion after looking at 646 studies on cancer medications. The authors of an accompanying editorial argue that the FDA should keep track of the compliance of studies receiving industry funding.

· Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

Comments

  • jenrio
    jenrio Member Posts: 558
    edited July 2013

    Slow is bad, but slow is better than never, which unfortunately happens a lot!

    The results could be bad, or they could be good.  Yet the projects are silently cut from business agenda and we never hear about the once-promising drug again.

    Do patients who risked their lives have rights to access the clinical trial data?     Currently, apparently not.  I wrote a blog post about clinical trial data transparency 2 weeks ago:  quoted completely here because BCO won't link to my blogpost.

    Every year hundreds of new agents are touted as potential cure for metastatic breast cancer and other deadly cancers.   Few got into early stage human trials often by small startup companies.   Some do well, some do ok, some do badly.     Big Pharmas could afford to buy dozens of these small startup companies.   And mostly these new agents are never heard from again.  The public has no idea which ones do well, ok, or badly.  These results were sealed,  should they be somehow accessible to public?   


    Several related issues about metastatic breast cancer funding and drug development are discussed here:


    Etacstil was once a promising breast cancer drug that performed ok or better in early stage human trial, but the company was acquired by BMS, and its early stage human trial's data was never published.   When its development and clinical trial was abandoned and existant tablets destroyed by BMS, patients who were doing well on that drug sued to try to stay on the drug, but to this day, results on its performance IS NOT accessible by public:


    This movement towards data openness started in Flu treatment, but will not end there.   

    Also in today's news, another *attempted* acquisition of a big cancer drug maker onyx by other even bigger drug maker amgen.   How does drug development for MBC and other deadly cancers changes with this kind of consolidation going on all the time?   Which project (on either side) will live, which project will die?   What happens to the acquired clinical trial data under the new overlord?   


     

     

    Big Pharma, little pharma are like any other business.   When the public hold out money without asking questions or putting in check/balances, it will ALWAYS be taken advantage of.

    My question is:

    How should we help in finding a metastatic breast cancer cure?   What change should we make in our laws and healthcare strategy?   Who should we recruit to make such changes?   FTC and/or  FDA?  researchers?  economists?  computer geeks?  media?

     

    more details in my blog http://killerboob.blogspot.com

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

Categories