Prevalence, characteristics, and publication of discontinued randomized trials.

IMPORTANCE The discontinuation of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) raises ethical concerns and often wastes scarce research resources. The epidemiology of discontinued RCTs, however, remains unclear. OBJECTIVES To determine the prevalence, characteristics, and publication history of discontinued RCTs and to investigate factors associated with RCT discontinuation due to poor recruitment and with nonpublication. DESIGN AND SETTING Retrospective cohort of RCTs based on archived protocols approved by 6 research ethics committees in Switzerland, Germany, and Canada between 2000 and 2003. We recorded trial characteristics and planned recruitment from included protocols. Last follow-up of RCTs was April 27, 2013. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Completion status, reported reasons for discontinuation, and publication status of RCTs as determined by correspondence with the research ethics committees, literature searches, and investigator surveys. RESULTS After a median follow-up of 11.6 years (range, 8.8-12.6 years), 253 of 1017 included RCTs were discontinued (24.9% [95% CI, 22.3%-27.6%]). Only 96 of 253 discontinuations (37.9% [95% CI, 32.0%-44.3%]) were reported to ethics committees. The most frequent reason for discontinuation was poor recruitment (101/1017; 9.9% [95% CI, 8.2%-12.0%]). In multivariable analysis, industry sponsorship vs investigator sponsorship (8.4% vs 26.5%; odds ratio [OR], 0.25 [95% CI, 0.15-0.43]; P < .001) and a larger planned sample size in increments of 100 (-0.7%; OR, 0.96 [95% CI, 0.92-1.00]; P = .04) were associated with lower rates of discontinuation due to poor recruitment. Discontinued trials were more likely to remain unpublished than completed trials (55.1% vs 33.6%; OR, 3.19 [95% CI, 2.29-4.43]; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this sample of trials based on RCT protocols from 6 research ethics committees, discontinuation was common, with poor recruitment being the most frequently reported reason. Greater efforts are needed to ensure the reporting of trial discontinuation to research ethics committees and the publication of results of discontinued trials.

[1]  Claire Snowdon,et al.  Does it matter if clinicians recruiting for a trial don't understand what the trial is really about? Qualitative study of surgeons' experiences of participation in a pragmatic multi-centre RCT , 2007, Trials.

[2]  G. Guyatt,et al.  Learning from failure - rationale and design for a study about discontinuation of randomized trials (DISCO study) , 2012, BMC Medical Research Methodology.

[3]  T. D. de Boo,et al.  Terminating clinical trials without sufficient subjects , 2012, Journal of Medical Ethics.

[4]  Frank Sullivan,et al.  Strategies to improve recruitment to randomised controlled trials. , 2010, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[5]  Role of a research ethics committee in follow-up and publication of results , 2003, The Lancet.

[6]  A. Gheorghe,et al.  Improving the recruitment activity of clinicians in randomised controlled trials: a systematic review , 2012, BMJ Open.

[7]  R. Gray,et al.  Preliminary evaluation of factors associated with premature trial closure and feasibility of accrual benchmarks in phase III oncology trials , 2010, Clinical trials.

[8]  Andrew Cook,et al.  A systematic review of models to predict recruitment to multicentre clinical trials , 2010, BMC medical research methodology.

[9]  P. Easterbrook,et al.  Fate of Research Studies , 1992, Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine.

[10]  R. Simes,et al.  Publication bias: evidence of delayed publication in a cohort study of clinical research projects , 1997, BMJ.

[11]  Clinical trial registration: a statement from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors , 2004, The Lancet.

[12]  G. Guyatt,et al.  Stopping randomized trials early for benefit and estimation of treatment effects: systematic review and meta-regression analysis. , 2010, JAMA.

[13]  Peter Bower,et al.  Short report: how often do UK primary care trials face recruitment delays? , 2007, Family practice.

[14]  J. Ioannidis,et al.  Systematic Review of the Empirical Evidence of Study Publication Bias and Outcome Reporting Bias , 2008, PloS one.

[15]  Michael G Kenward,et al.  Multiple imputation: current perspectives , 2007, Statistical methods in medical research.

[16]  E. von Elm,et al.  Publication and non-publication of clinical trials: longitudinal study of applications submitted to a research ethics committee. , 2008, Swiss medical weekly.

[17]  G. Guyatt,et al.  Prospectively screening for eligible patients was inaccurate in predicting patient recruitment of orthopedic randomized trials. , 2011, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[18]  D Elbourne,et al.  Recruitment to randomised trials: strategies for trial enrollment and participation study. The STEPS study. , 2007, Health technology assessment.

[19]  John Hoey,et al.  Clinical trial registration: a statement from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. , 2004, JAMA.

[20]  B. Delaney,et al.  General practice Randomised controlled trials in primary care : case study , 2022 .

[21]  E. Decullier,et al.  Fate of biomedical research protocols and publication bias in France: retrospective cohort study , 2005, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[22]  Sara T Brookes,et al.  A review of reporting of participant recruitment and retention in RCTs in six major journals , 2009, Trials.