Discrepancies between ClinicalTrials.gov recruitment status and actual trial status: a cross-sectional analysis

Objectives To determine the accuracy of the recruitment status listed on ClinicalTrials.gov as compared with the actual trial status. Design Cross-sectional analysis. Setting Random sample of interventional phase 2–4 clinical trials registered between 2010 and 2012 on ClinicalTrials.gov. Primary outcome measure For each trial which was listed within ClinicalTrials.gov as ongoing, two investigators performed a comprehensive literature search for evidence that the trial had actually been completed. For each trial listed as completed or terminated early by ClinicalTrials.gov, we compared the date that the trial was actually concluded with the date the registry was updated to reflect the study’s conclusion status. Results Among the 405 included trials, 92 had a registry status indicating that study activity was either ongoing or the recruitment status was unknown. Of these, published results were available for 34 (37%). Among the 313 concluded trials, the median delay between study completion and a registry update reflecting that the study had ended was 141 days (IQR 48–419), with delays of over 1 year present for 29%. In total, 125 trials (31%) either had a listed recruitment status which was incorrect or had a delay of more than 1 year between the time the study was concluded and the time the registry recruitment status was updated. Conclusions At present, registry recruitment status information in ClinicalTrials.gov is often outdated or wrong. This inaccuracy has implications for the ability of researchers to identify completed trials and accurately characterise all available medical knowledge on a given subject.

[1]  Christopher W. Jones,et al.  Clinical trials registries are under-utilized in the conduct of systematic reviews: a cross-sectional analysis , 2014, Systematic Reviews.

[2]  Thomas J. Smith,et al.  Systemic Therapy for Stage IV Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline Update. , 2015, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[3]  David Moher,et al.  Comparison of registered and published primary outcomes in randomized controlled trials. , 2009, JAMA.

[4]  Christopher W. Jones,et al.  Non-publication of large randomized clinical trials: cross sectional analysis , 2013, BMJ.

[5]  Harlan M. Krumholz,et al.  Trial Publication after Registration in ClinicalTrials.Gov: A Cross-Sectional Analysis , 2009, PLoS medicine.

[6]  J.,et al.  The New England Journal of Medicine , 2012 .

[7]  P. Santaguida,et al.  Methodology used to develop the AANS/CNS management of brain metastases evidence-based clinical practice parameter guidelines , 2009, Journal of Neuro-Oncology.

[8]  Phil Edwards,et al.  Effect of tranexamic acid on surgical bleeding: systematic review and cumulative meta-analysis , 2012, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[9]  Dean A Fergusson,et al.  Association of hydroxyethyl starch administration with mortality and acute kidney injury in critically ill patients requiring volume resuscitation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. , 2013, JAMA.

[10]  Harlan M Krumholz,et al.  Publication of NIH funded trials registered in ClinicalTrials.gov: cross sectional analysis , 2012, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[11]  James Topping,et al.  Compliance with results reporting at ClinicalTrials.gov. , 2015, The New England journal of medicine.

[12]  D. Matthews,et al.  Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors for treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus in the clinical setting: systematic review and meta-analysis , 2012, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[13]  B. Levy,et al.  Systemic therapy for small cell lung cancer. , 2013, Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network : JNCCN.

[14]  Tony Tse,et al.  Update on Trial Registration 11 Years after the ICMJE Policy Was Established. , 2017, The New England journal of medicine.

[15]  P. Ravaud,et al.  Characteristics and Public Availability of Results of Clinical Trials on Rare Diseases Registered at Clinicaltrials.gov. , 2016, JAMA internal medicine.

[16]  J. Lindh,et al.  Vitamin D and Respiratory Tract Infections: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials , 2013, PloS one.

[17]  D. Grobbee,et al.  Effects of fibrates on cardiovascular outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis , 2010, The Lancet.

[18]  Timothy F. Platts-Mills,et al.  Comparison of registered and published outcomes in randomized controlled trials: a systematic review , 2015, BMC Medicine.

[19]  Ben Goldacre,et al.  The TrialsTracker: Automated ongoing monitoring of failure to share clinical trial results by all major companies and research institutions , 2016, F1000Research.

[20]  Isabelle Boutron,et al.  Timing and Completeness of Trial Results Posted at ClinicalTrials.gov and Published in Journals , 2013, PLoS medicine.

[21]  G. Guyatt,et al.  Incretin treatment and risk of pancreatitis in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised and non-randomised studies , 2014, BMJ : British Medical Journal.