Abstract 1762P
Background
Dissemination of research results, including data from clinical trials, is one of the essential responsibilities of all scientists. Moreover, whole community of researchers, patients, and general public, should have access to research data at earliest possible moment. However, significant delay between completion of the study and publication of its results has been observed; thus, we aimed to analyze the time from database lockdown to publication and factors that might be associated with it.
Methods
We analyzed all original publications reporting any clinical data published in 2020 and 2021 in 2 leading oncological journal – Journal of Clinical Oncology (JCO) and Annals of Oncology (AoO). Information of cut-off (database lock) date, publication date, type of the study and its sponsor has been extracted. Descriptive statistics, t-test and chi-square tests were used for statistical analyses.
Results
Overall, 652 articles (482 from JCO, 170 from AoO) has been identified - 63% (411) reported results of clinical trials, 47% (193) of them reporting data from clinical trials. Only 52.3% (341) of trials reported the cut-off date. Reports from clinical trials reported cut-off date more often than other studies (65.5% vs 29.9%, p<0.001). Median time from data cut-off to publication (PT) was 15.4 months (range 1.2-130.8), with PT of 12-24 months and >24 months being 45.2% (154) and 22.6% (77), respectively. Reports of studies other than clinical trials had PT>24m more often than clinical trials (36.1% vs 19%; p=0.003). Commercially sponsored studies reported cut-off date more often than academic studies (79.2% vs 41.4%; p<0.001) but there was no difference in PT depending on type of sponsor (p=0.170).
Conclusions
Despite presence of reporting guidelines, significant proportion of scientific publications do not report exact date of data cut-off or last follow-up what make difficult to assess topicality and maturity of data. Moreover, nearly one-quarter of publications report results that are older than 2 years. Causes leading to such disproportion and publication of outdated results may lead on the authors’, editors’ or publishers’ side and need to be studied in more depth to ensure timely publication of relevant research data.
Clinical trial identification
Editorial acknowledgement
Legal entity responsible for the study
The authors.
Funding
Has not received any funding.
Disclosure
P. Sobczuk: Financial Interests, Personal, Other, Travel grant: Novartis; Financial Interests, Personal, Other, Travel Grant: MSD, BMS; Financial Interests, Personal, Invited Speaker: Swixx BioPharma, BMS, Gilead; Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: Sandoz; Financial Interests, Personal, Stocks/Shares: CelonPharma; Non-Financial Interests, Institutional, Product Samples: Immutep; Non-Financial Interests, Leadership Role, Board Member, Chair of Young Oncologists Section: Polish Society of Clinical Oncology. P. Rutkowski: Financial Interests, Personal, Invited Speaker, honoraria for lectures: MSD, BMS, Pierre Fabre; Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: MSD, BMS, Pierre Fabre, Merck, Sanofi, Blueprint Medicines, Philogen; Financial Interests, Personal, Invited Speaker: Merck, Sanofi, Novartis, AstraZeneca; Financial Interests, Institutional, Research Grant, research grant for ISS: Pfizer; Financial Interests, Institutional, Funding, research grant for institution: BMS; Non-Financial Interests, Member of Board of Directors: Polish Society of Surgical Oncology; Non-Financial Interests, Member of Board of Directors, President: Polish Oncological Society. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.
Resources from the same session
1902P - Comparison of cabozantinib (CABO) versus sunitinib (SUN) following first-line (1L) nivolumab plus ipilimumab (NIVO+IPI) for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC): A target trial emulation using real-world data from the International mRCC Database Consortium (IMDC)
Presenter: Audreylie Lemelin
Session: Poster session 23
1903P - Tumor response by baseline metastases in patients (pts) with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) treated with lenvatinib (L) plus pembrolizumab (P) vs sunitinib (S): Post hoc analysis of the CLEAR trial
Presenter: Viktor Gruenwald
Session: Poster session 23
1904P - Treatment options and outcome of metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients with brain or bone metastases: A real-world evidence from a German retrospective multi-center analysis
Presenter: Pia Paffenholz
Session: Poster session 23
1905P - Heterogeneity in tertiary lymphoid structures predicts the distinct prognosis and immune microenvironment of clear cell renal cell carcinoma
Presenter: Wenhao Xu
Session: Poster session 23
1906P - Metastasized non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma: Which entities are dangerous? Results learned from reference pathology of the SuniForecast study
Presenter: Arndt Hartmann
Session: Poster session 23
1907P - Multi-omics mapping positions antigenic myeloid-T cell crosstalk at the core of advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC) response to immune checkpoint blockade (ICB)
Presenter: Lisa Kinget
Session: Poster session 23
1908P - Utility of circulating tumor (ct)DNA testing for molecular residual disease (MRD) detection and treatment response monitoring in patients (pts) with renal cell carcinoma (RCC)
Presenter: Michael Smigelski
Session: Poster session 23
1909P - Baseline cytokine levels according to the line of treatment in patients with metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma treated with nivolumab: NIVOREN GETUG-AFU 26 translational study
Presenter: Larissa Rainho
Session: Poster session 23
1910P - Evaluation of a genome-wide methylome enrichment platform for circulating tumor DNA quantification and prognostic performance in renal cell carcinoma (RCC)
Presenter: Brian Rini
Session: Poster session 23
1911P - Effect of VHL mutations on efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors in renal cell carcinoma
Presenter: Guojie Yu
Session: Poster session 23