Compliance with mandatory reporting of clinical trial results on ClinicalTrials.gov: cross sectional study

Objective To examine compliance with mandatory reporting of summary clinical trial results (within one year of completion of trial) on ClinicalTrials.gov for studies that fall under the recent Food and Drug Administration Amendments Act (FDAAA) legislation. Design Registry based study of clinical trial summaries. Data sources ClinicalTrials.gov, searched on 19 January 2011, with cross referencing with Drugs@FDA to determine for which trials mandatory reporting was required within one year. Selection criteria Studies registered on ClinicalTrials.gov with US sites which completed between 1 January and 31 December 2009. Main outcome measure Proportion of trials for which results had been reported. Results The ClinicalTrials.gov registry contained 83 579 entries for interventional trials, of which 5642 were completed within the timescale of interest. We identified trials as falling within the mandatory reporting rules if they were covered by the FDAAA (trials of a drug, device, or biological agent, which have at least one US site, and are of phase II or later) and if they investigated a drug that already had approval from the Food and Drug Administration. Of these, 163/738 (22%) had reported results within one year of completion of the trial compared with 76/727 (10%) trials that were not subject to mandatory reporting (95% confidence interval for the difference in proportions 7.8% to 15.5%; χ2 test, P=2.6×10−9). Later phase trials were more likely to report results (P=4.4×10−11), as were industry funded trials (P=2.2×10−16). Conclusion Most trials subject to mandatory reporting did not report results within a year of completion

Do guidelines for treating chest disease in children use Cochrane Reviews effectively?: a systematic review

Cochrane Reviews summarise best evidence and should inform guidelines. We assessed the use of Cochrane Reviews in the UK guidelines for paediatric respiratory disease. We found 21 guidelines which made 1025 recommendations, of which 96 could be informed by a Cochrane Review. In 38/96 recommendations (40%), some or all of the relevant Cochrane Reviews were not cited. We linked recommendations to 140 Cochrane Reviews. In 37/140 (26%) cases, the guideline recommendation did not fully agree with the Cochrane Review. Guideline developers may fail to use Cochrane Reviews or may make recommendations which are not in line with best evidence

The pharmacokinetics and toxicity of morning vs. evening tobramycin dosing for pulmonary exacerbations of cystic fibrosis:A randomised comparison

AbstractBackgroundCircadian variation in renal toxicity of aminoglycosides has been demonstrated in animal and human studies. People with CF are frequently prescribed aminoglycosides. Altered pharmacokinetics of aminoglycosides are predictive of toxicity.AimTo investigate whether the time of day of aminoglycoside administration modulates renal excretion of tobramycin and toxicity in children with CF. To determine whether circadian rhythms are disrupted in children with CF during hospital admission.MethodsChildren (age 5–18years) with CF scheduled for tobramycin therapy were randomly allocated to receive tobramycin at 0800 or 2000h. Serum tobramycin levels were drawn at 1h and between 3.5 and 5h post-infusion between days 5 and 9 of therapy. Melatonin levels were measured serially at intervals from 1800h in the evening until 1200h on the next day. Circadian rhythm was categorised as normal when dim light melatonin onset was demonstrated between 1800 and 2200h and/or peak melatonin levels were observed during the night. Weight and spirometry were measured at the start and end of the therapy. Urinary biomarkers of kidney toxicity (KIM1, NAG, NGAL, IL-18 and CysC) were assayed at the start and end of the course of tobramycin.ResultsEighteen children were recruited to the study. There were no differences in renal clearance between the morning and evening groups. The increase in urinary KIM-1 was greater in the evening dosage group compared to the morning group (mean difference, 0.73ng/mg; 95% CI, 0.14 to 1.32; p=0.018). There were no differences in the other urinary biomarkers. There was normal circadian rhythm in 7/11 participants (64%).ConclusionsRenal elimination of tobramycin was not affected by the time of day of administration. Urinary KIM-1 raises the possibility of greater nephrotoxicity with evening administration. Four children showed disturbed circadian rhythm and high melatonin levels (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01207245)

Do guidelines for treating chest disease in children use Cochrane Reviews effectively?: a systematic review

Cochrane Reviews summarise best evidence and should inform guidelines. We assessed the use of Cochrane Reviews in the UK guidelines for paediatric respiratory disease. We found 21 guidelines which made 1025 recommendations, of which 96 could be informed by a Cochrane Review. In 38/96 recommendations (40%), some or all of the relevant Cochrane Reviews were not cited. We linked recommendations to 140 Cochrane Reviews. In 37/140 (26%) cases, the guideline recommendation did not fully agree with the Cochrane Review. Guideline developers may fail to use Cochrane Reviews or may make recommendations which are not in line with best evidence

Intravenous antibiotics for pulmonary exacerbations in people with cystic fibrosis

BACKGROUND: Cystic fibrosis is a multi-system disease characterised by the production of thick secretions causing recurrent pulmonary infection, often with unusual bacteria. Intravenous antibiotics are commonly used in the treatment of acute deteriorations in symptoms (pulmonary exacerbations); however, recently the assumption that exacerbations are due to increases in bacterial burden has been questioned. OBJECTIVES: To establish if intravenous antibiotics for the treatment of pulmonary exacerbations in people with cystic fibrosis improve short- and long-term clinical outcomes. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis Trials Register, compiled from electronic database searches and handsearching of journals and conference abstract books. We also searched the reference lists of relevant articles and reviews and ongoing trials registers.Date of last search of Cochrane trials register: 27 July 2015. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials and the first treatment cycle of cross-over studies comparing intravenous antibiotics (given alone or in an antibiotic combination) with placebo, inhaled or oral antibiotics for people with cystic fibrosis experiencing a pulmonary exacerbation. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The authors assessed studies for eligibility and risk of bias and extracted data. MAIN RESULTS: We included 40 studies involving 1717 participants. The quality of the included studies was largely poor and, with a few exceptions, these comprised of mainly small, inadequately reported studies.When comparing treatment with a single antibiotic to a combined antibiotic regimen, those participants receiving a combination of antibiotics experienced a greater improvement in lung function when considered as a whole group across a number of different measurements of lung function, but with very low quality evidence. When limited to the four placebo-controlled studies (n = 214), no difference was observed, again with very low quality evidence. With regard to the review's remaining primary outcomes, there was no effect upon time to next exacerbation and no studies in any comparison reported on quality of life. There were no effects on the secondary outcomes weight or adverse effects. When comparing specific antibiotic combinations there were no significant differences between groups on any measure. In the comparisons between intravenous and nebulised antibiotic or oral antibiotic (low quality evidence), there were no significant differences between groups on any measure. No studies in any comparison reported on quality of life. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The quality of evidence comparing intravenous antibiotics with placebo is poor. No specific antibiotic combination can be considered to be superior to any other, and neither is there evidence showing that the intravenous route is superior to the inhaled or oral routes. There remains a need to understand host-bacteria interactions and in particular to understand why many people fail to fully respond to treatment