Clinical Trial Data Underreported: Study

One-third of the human experiments for approved drugs failed transparency requirements.

kerry grens
Kerry Grens

Kerry served as The Scientist’s news director until 2021. Before joining The Scientist in 2013, she was a stringer for Reuters Health, the senior health and science reporter at...

View full profile.

Learn about our editorial policies.

Nov 16, 2015

PIXABAY, ADNOWAKVolunteers for clinical trials shouldn’t get their hopes up too high that data from their participation will ever get published. An analysis of clinical trials for a sampling of drugs approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), published in BMJ Open last week (November 12), found that just one-third of the clinical trials that ought to have been reported by the trial sponsors were indeed published.

“Right now, there’s a big push for evidence-based medicine. It’s impossible to have evidence-based medicine without the evidence,” Jennifer Miller, the lead author of the study, president of Bioethics International, and an ethicist at New York University’s Langone Medical Center, told The Washington Post.

Miller and her colleagues looked at clinical studies related to 12 new drugs approved by the FDA in 2012. Among the 318 trials, a median of 17 percent were subject to reporting requirements. While...

Some firms performed better than others in being transparent. Johnson & Johnson, Gilead, and GlaxoSmithKline, for instance, were 100 percent compliant for the drug each company got approved. Pfizer was totally compliant for two drugs, and failed to follow the law for another. Genentech (owned by Roche) was also noncompliant for two drugs.

Interested in reading more?

Clinical Trial Data Underreported: Study



Become a Member of

Receive full access to more than 35 years of archived stories, digital editions of The Scientist Magazine, and much more!
Already a member?