This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Purchase Article View Shopping Cart Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a colleague Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Save to my personal folders Download to citation manager Rights & Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Tam, V. C. Articles by Hotte, S. J. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Tam, V. C. Articles by Hotte, S. J. Social Bookmarking                            What's this?

Consistency of Phase III Clinical Trial Abstracts Presented at an Annual Meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology Compared With Their Subsequent Full-Text Publications

Vincent C. Tam, Sebastien J. Hotte

From the Department of Medicine, McMaster University; and the Department of Oncology, Juravinski Cancer Centre, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada

Corresponding author: Sebastien J. Hotte, MD, Juravinski Cancer Centre, 699 Concession St, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, L8V 5C2; e-mail: sebastien.hotte{at}hrcc.on.ca

Purpose This study aimed to determine the consistency of phase III clinical trial abstracts presented at American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Annual Meetings compared with their subsequent full-text publications.

Methods We identified abstracts describing phase III clinical trials of chemotherapy, chemoradiotherapy, immunotherapy, and hormone therapy presented at the 36th ASCO Annual Meeting in May 2000. We searched MEDLINE and PubMed for all corresponding publications. Data were extracted from the abstracts and publications that met our inclusion criteria.

Results A total of 192 abstracts were identified. Seventy-four abstracts met our inclusion criteria. Six years after the 2000 ASCO Meeting, 74% of abstracts had corresponding publications. The primary end point was stated in 34% of abstracts and 100% of published papers. The primary end point result differed by more than 5% between the abstract and publication in 42% of comparisons. The statistical significance of the primary end point and study conclusions were consistent between abstracts and subsequent publications in 89% and 91% of the comparisons, respectively. Abstracts selected as plenary or oral presentations were significantly more likely to be published. No factors predicted consistency for primary end point significance and overall conclusion between ASCO abstracts and their journal publications.

Conclusion When carefully selected, ASCO Annual Meeting abstracts of phase III trials consistently reflect final published results, but some differences were observed that warrant caution in using abstract results to shape treatment decisions before full publication.

Presented in part at the 43rd Annual Meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, Chicago, IL, June 1, 2007.

Authors’ disclosures of potential conflicts of interest and author contributions are found at the end of this article.

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Facebook    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				E. D. Saad, A. Mangabeira, A. L. Masson, and F. E. Prisco The geography of clinical cancer research: analysis of abstracts presented at the American Society of Clinical Oncology Annual Meetings Ann. Onc., August 28, 2009; (2009) mdp350v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. M. Booth, A. Le Maitre, K. Ding, K. Farn, M. Fralick, C. Phillips, D. W. Cescon, and R. M. Meyer Presentation of Nonfinal Results of Randomized Controlled Trials at Major Oncology Meetings J. Clin. Oncol., August 20, 2009; 27(24): 3938 - 3944. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				E. P. Balaban, M. C. Brouwers, S. B. Temin, and G. H. Lyman Issues in Clinical Practice Guideline Implementation and Utilization ASCO Educational Book, January 1, 2009; 2009(1): 338 - 344. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]