A 10-year update to the principles for clinical trial data sharing by pharmaceutical companies: perspectives based on a decade of literature and policies

Data sharing is essential for promoting scientific discoveries and informed decision-making in clinical practice. In 2013, PhRMA/EFPIA recognised the importance of data sharing and supported initiatives to enhance clinical trial data transparency and promote scientific advancements. However, despite these commitments, recent investigations indicate significant scope for improvements in data sharing by the pharmaceutical industry. Drawing on a decade of literature and policy developments, this article presents perspectives from a multidisciplinary team of researchers, clinicians, and consumers. The focus is on policy and process updates to the PhRMA/EFPIA 2013 data sharing commitments, aiming to enhance the sharing and accessibility of participant-level data, clinical study reports, protocols, statistical analysis plans, lay summaries, and result publications from pharmaceutical industry-sponsored trials. The proposed updates provide clear recommendations regarding which data should be shared, when it should be shared, and under what conditions. The suggested improvements aim to develop a data sharing ecosystem that supports science and patient-centred care. Good data sharing principles require resources, time, and commitment. Notwithstanding these challenges, enhancing data sharing is necessary for efficient resource utilization, increased scientific collaboration, and better decision-making for patients and healthcare professionals.

Incidence and mortality from cervical cancer and other malignancies after treatment of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature

BACKGROUND

Although local treatments for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) are highly effective, it has been reported that treated women remain at increased risk of cervical and other cancers. Our aim is to explore the risk of developing or dying from cervical cancer and other human papillomavirus (HPV)- and non-HPV-related malignancies after CIN treatment and infer its magnitude compared with the general population.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Eligibility criteria: Studies with registry-based follow-up reporting cancer incidence or mortality after CIN treatment.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Summary effects were estimated using random-effects models.

OUTCOMES

Incidence rate of cervical cancer among women treated for CIN (per 100 000 woman-years). Relative risk (RR) of cervical cancer, other HPV-related anogenital tract cancer (vagina, vulva, anus), any cancer, and mortality, for women treated for CIN versus the general population.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven studies were eligible. The incidence rate for cervical cancer after CIN treatment was 39 per 100 000 woman-years (95% confidence interval 22-69). The RR of cervical cancer was elevated compared with the general population (3.30, 2.57-4.24; P < 0.001). The RR was higher for women more than 50 years old and remained elevated for at least 20 years after treatment. The RR of vaginal (10.84, 5.58-21.10; P < 0.001), vulvar (3.34, 2.39-4.67; P < 0.001), and anal cancer (5.11, 2.73-9.55; P < 0.001) was also higher. Mortality from cervical/vaginal cancer was elevated, but our estimate was more uncertain (RR 5.04, 0.69-36.94; P = 0.073).

CONCLUSIONS

Women treated for CIN have a considerably higher risk to be later diagnosed with cervical and other HPV-related cancers compared with the general population. The higher risk of cervical cancer lasts for at least 20 years after treatment and is higher for women more than 50 years of age. Prolonged follow-up beyond the last screening round may be warranted for previously treated women.

The use of human papillomavirus DNA methylation in cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Methylation of viral DNA has been proposed as a novel biomarker for triage of human papillomavirus (HPV) positive women at screening. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to assess how methylation levels change with disease severity and to determine diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) in detecting high-grade cervical intra-epithelial neoplasia (CIN).

METHODS

We performed searches in MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL from inception to October 2019. Studies were eligible if they explored HPV methylation levels in HPV positive women. Data were extracted in duplicate and requested from authors where necessary. Random-effects models and a bivariate mixed-effects binary regression model were applied to determine pooled effect estimates.

FINDINGS

44 studies with 8819 high-risk HPV positive women were eligible. The pooled estimates for positive methylation rate in HPV16 L1 gene were higher for high-grade CIN (≥CIN2/high-grade squamous intra-epithelial lesion (HSIL) (95% confidence interval (95%CI:72·7% (47·8-92·2))) vs. low-grade CIN (≤CIN1/low-grade squamous intra-epithelial lesion (LSIL) (44·4% (95%CI:16·0-74·1))). Pooled difference in mean methylation level was significantly higher in ≥CIN2/HSIL vs. ≤CIN1/LSIL for HPV16 L1 (11·3% (95%CI:6·5-16·1)). Pooled odds ratio of HPV16 L1 methylation was 5·5 (95%CI:3·5-8·5) for ≥CIN2/HSIL vs. ≤CIN1/LSIL (p < 0·0001). HPV16 L1/L2 genes performed best in predicting CIN2 or worse (pooled sensitivity 77% (95%CI:63-87), specificity 64% (95%CI:55-71), area under the curve (0·73 (95%CI:0·69-0·77)).

INTERPRETATION

Higher HPV methylation is associated with increased disease severity, whilst HPV16 L1/L2 genes demonstrated high diagnostic accuracy to detect high-grade CIN in HPV16 positive women. Direct clinical use is limited by the need for a multi-genotype and standardised assays. Next-generation multiplex HPV sequencing assays are under development and allow potential for rapid, automated and low-cost methylation testing.

FUNDING

NIHR, Genesis Research Trust, Imperial Healthcare Charity, Wellcome Trust NIHR Imperial BRC, European Union's Horizon 2020.

Comparative safety of serotonin (5-HT3) receptor antagonists in patients undergoing surgery: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Serotonin (5-HT3) receptor antagonists are commonly used to decrease nausea and vomiting for surgery patients, but these agents may be harmful. We conducted a systematic review on the comparative safety of 5-HT3 receptor antagonists.

METHODS

Searches were done in MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials to identify studies comparing 5-HT3 receptor antagonists with each other, placebo, and/or other antiemetic agents for patients undergoing surgical procedures. Screening search results, data abstraction, and risk of bias assessment were conducted by two reviewers independently. Random-effects pairwise meta-analysis and network meta-analysis (NMA) were conducted. PROSPERO registry number: CRD42013003564.

RESULTS

Overall, 120 studies and 27,787 patients were included after screening of 7,608 citations and 1,014 full-text articles. Significantly more patients receiving granisetron plus dexamethasone experienced an arrhythmia relative to placebo (odds ratio (OR) 2.96, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.11-7.94), ondansetron (OR 3.23, 95 % CI 1.17-8.95), dolasetron (OR 4.37, 95 % CI 1.51-12.62), tropisetron (OR 3.27, 95 % CI 1.02-10.43), and ondansetron plus dexamethasone (OR 5.75, 95 % CI 1.71-19.34) in a NMA including 31 randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and 6,623 patients of all ages. No statistically significant differences in delirium frequency were observed across all treatment comparisons in a NMA including 18 RCTs and 3,652 patients.

CONCLUSION

Granisetron plus dexamethasone increases the risk of arrhythmia.