Abstract:IMPORTANCE Unreported clinical trial results represent a violation of human rights. Oncology trials account for nearly 30% of interventional biopharmaceutical clinical studies registered on ClinicalTrials.gov and are the most numerous among all disciplines.OBJECTIVE To analyze the reporting of results among all interventional oncology trials registered on ClinicalTrials.gov from 2007 through 2017.DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This cohort study analyzed all clinical studies registered between June 1, 2007, and May 8, 2017, on ClinicalTrials.gov, the largest public clinical trial registry in the world. Trials with a recruitment status of completed or terminated and a primary completion date of on or before September 30, 2017, were selected. Data were analyzed between February 20, 2021, and February 26, 2021.MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The main outcome was the percentage of trials that reported results either on ClinicalTrials.gov or in journal publications within 24 months of the primary completion date. Journal publication was ascertained by searching ClinicalTrials.gov for a link to the publication, PubMed using national clinical trial number, and Embase using national clinical trial number and filters.RESULTS Of the 12 240 clinical trials registered in ClinicalTrials.gov, 7425 trials (60.7%; 95% CI, 60.0%-61.5%) reported results, with a 34.0% (95% CI, 30.3%-37.7%) increase in 24-month reporting rate from 2007 to 2017. Multivariable analyses confirmed that more recent trials (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.11 per year increase; 95% CI, 1.10-1.13) and trials with larger sample sizes (51-100 patients: adjusted HR, 1.17 [95% CI, 1.09-1.24]; >100 patients: adjusted HR, 1.43 [95% CI, 1.33-1.54]) were more likely to report results. Terminated trials were less likely to report results compared with completed trials (adjusted HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.83-0.93). Compared with trials funded by industry, those funded by the National Institutes of Health were more likely to report results (adjusted HR, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.29-1.49), whereas those funded by other academic or nonprofit organizations were less likely to report results (adjusted HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.62-0.70). Among all 7425 trials, the results of 2807 trials (37.8%; 95% CI, 36.7%-38.9%) were posted only on ClinicalTrials.gov. These trials tended to be terminated early and to have small sample sizes (<= 50 patients) compared with trials that published results in journals.CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE This study found a gradual improvement in results reporting among oncology trials over a 10-year period. Trial registries could serve as a results reporting platform for unpublished trials and as a data source of trial outcomes for future studies.

Quality of Reporting in Oncology Randomized Controlled Trials

Quality of reporting of modern randomized controlled trials in medical oncology: a systematic review

Reporting quality of randomized, controlled trials evaluating immunotherapy in lung cancer

Do Published Data in Trials Assessing Cancer Drugs Reflect the Real Picture of Efficacy and Safety?

Unsatisfied Reporting Quality of Clinical Trials Evaluating Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Therapy in Cancer

Quality of Reporting in Surgical Randomized Clinical Trials.

Quality Assessment of Randomized Controlled Trial Report in the Field of Breast Cancer Published in Chinese

Evaluation Of Oncology Trial Results Reporting Over A 10-Year Period

Are Reports of Randomized Controlled Trials Improving over Time? A Systematic Review of 284 Articles Published in High-Impact General and Specialized Medical Journals

The Quality of Reporting of Randomized Trials Related to Digestive Diseases in 2008 and 1998:A Comparative Study

The quality of reports of randomised trials in 2000 and 2006: comparative study of articles indexed in PubMed

Safety Reporting in Randomized Controlled Trial Related to Breast Cancer Published in China

Assessment of the Reporting Quality of Ophthalmic Diseases Related Randomized Controlled Trials Published in SCI Journals from Mainland China

Assessment of the Quality of Reporting in Abstracts of Randomized Controlled Trials Published in Five Leading Chinese Medical Journals

Reporting Quality of Randomized, Controlled Trials Evaluating Combined Chemoradiotherapy in Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma.

The Quality of Reporting of Randomized Controlled Trials of Traditional Chinese Medicine: a Survey of 13 Randomly Selected Journals from Mainland China.

Current Situation on the Reporting Quality of Randomized Controlled Trials in 5 Leading Chinese Medical Journals

The reporting quality of randomized controlled trials in pharmacotherapy for pituitary adenomas

Reporting Quality of English Abstracts of Randomized Controlled Trials Published in Major Chinese Medical Journals

Quality of reporting of cranial irradiation techniques in randomized controlled trials of primary brain tumors: A systematic review

Adverse Event Reporting Quality in Cancer Clinical Trials Evaluating Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Therapy: A Systematic Review