Nonindustry-sponsored preclinical studies on statins yield greater efficacy estimates than industry-sponsored studies: a meta-analysis.

Industry-sponsored clinical drug studies are associated with publication of outcomes that favor the sponsor, even when controlling for potential bias in the methods used. However, the influence of sponsorship bias has not been examined in preclinical animal studies. We performed a meta-analysis of p...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	David Krauth, Andrew Anglemyer, Rose Philipps, Lisa Bero
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2014
Materias:	Biology (General) QH301-705.5
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/dcc9bf7e8a0c4f7d947c2af9f62876fe
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:dcc9bf7e8a0c4f7d947c2af9f62876fe
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:dcc9bf7e8a0c4f7d947c2af9f62876fe2021-11-18T05:37:37ZNonindustry-sponsored preclinical studies on statins yield greater efficacy estimates than industry-sponsored studies: a meta-analysis.1544-91731545-788510.1371/journal.pbio.1001770https://doaj.org/article/dcc9bf7e8a0c4f7d947c2af9f62876fe2014-01-01T00:00:00Zhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmid/24465178/?tool=EBIhttps://doaj.org/toc/1544-9173https://doaj.org/toc/1545-7885Industry-sponsored clinical drug studies are associated with publication of outcomes that favor the sponsor, even when controlling for potential bias in the methods used. However, the influence of sponsorship bias has not been examined in preclinical animal studies. We performed a meta-analysis of preclinical statin studies to determine whether industry sponsorship is associated with either increased effect sizes of efficacy outcomes and/or risks of bias in a cohort of published preclinical statin studies. We searched Medline (January 1966-April 2012) and identified 63 studies evaluating the effects of statins on atherosclerosis outcomes in animals. Two coders independently extracted study design criteria aimed at reducing bias, results for all relevant outcomes, sponsorship source, and investigator financial ties. The I(2) statistic was used to examine heterogeneity. We calculated the standardized mean difference (SMD) for each outcome and pooled data across studies to estimate the pooled average SMD using random effects models. In a priori subgroup analyses, we assessed statin efficacy by outcome measured, sponsorship source, presence or absence of financial conflict information, use of an optimal time window for outcome assessment, accounting for all animals, inclusion criteria, blinding, and randomization. The effect of statins was significantly larger for studies sponsored by nonindustry sources (-1.99; 95% CI -2.68, -1.31) versus studies sponsored by industry (-0.73; 95% CI -1.00, -0.47) (p value<0.001). Statin efficacy did not differ by disclosure of financial conflict information, use of an optimal time window for outcome assessment, accounting for all animals, inclusion criteria, blinding, and randomization. Possible reasons for the differences between nonindustry- and industry-sponsored studies, such as selective reporting of outcomes, require further study.David KrauthAndrew AnglemyerRose PhilippsLisa BeroPublic Library of Science (PLoS)articleBiology (General)QH301-705.5ENPLoS Biology, Vol 12, Iss 1, p e1001770 (2014)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Biology (General) QH301-705.5
spellingShingle	Biology (General) QH301-705.5 David Krauth Andrew Anglemyer Rose Philipps Lisa Bero Nonindustry-sponsored preclinical studies on statins yield greater efficacy estimates than industry-sponsored studies: a meta-analysis.
description	Industry-sponsored clinical drug studies are associated with publication of outcomes that favor the sponsor, even when controlling for potential bias in the methods used. However, the influence of sponsorship bias has not been examined in preclinical animal studies. We performed a meta-analysis of preclinical statin studies to determine whether industry sponsorship is associated with either increased effect sizes of efficacy outcomes and/or risks of bias in a cohort of published preclinical statin studies. We searched Medline (January 1966-April 2012) and identified 63 studies evaluating the effects of statins on atherosclerosis outcomes in animals. Two coders independently extracted study design criteria aimed at reducing bias, results for all relevant outcomes, sponsorship source, and investigator financial ties. The I(2) statistic was used to examine heterogeneity. We calculated the standardized mean difference (SMD) for each outcome and pooled data across studies to estimate the pooled average SMD using random effects models. In a priori subgroup analyses, we assessed statin efficacy by outcome measured, sponsorship source, presence or absence of financial conflict information, use of an optimal time window for outcome assessment, accounting for all animals, inclusion criteria, blinding, and randomization. The effect of statins was significantly larger for studies sponsored by nonindustry sources (-1.99; 95% CI -2.68, -1.31) versus studies sponsored by industry (-0.73; 95% CI -1.00, -0.47) (p value<0.001). Statin efficacy did not differ by disclosure of financial conflict information, use of an optimal time window for outcome assessment, accounting for all animals, inclusion criteria, blinding, and randomization. Possible reasons for the differences between nonindustry- and industry-sponsored studies, such as selective reporting of outcomes, require further study.
format	article
author	David Krauth Andrew Anglemyer Rose Philipps Lisa Bero
author_facet	David Krauth Andrew Anglemyer Rose Philipps Lisa Bero
author_sort	David Krauth
title	Nonindustry-sponsored preclinical studies on statins yield greater efficacy estimates than industry-sponsored studies: a meta-analysis.
title_short	Nonindustry-sponsored preclinical studies on statins yield greater efficacy estimates than industry-sponsored studies: a meta-analysis.
title_full	Nonindustry-sponsored preclinical studies on statins yield greater efficacy estimates than industry-sponsored studies: a meta-analysis.
title_fullStr	Nonindustry-sponsored preclinical studies on statins yield greater efficacy estimates than industry-sponsored studies: a meta-analysis.
title_full_unstemmed	Nonindustry-sponsored preclinical studies on statins yield greater efficacy estimates than industry-sponsored studies: a meta-analysis.
title_sort	nonindustry-sponsored preclinical studies on statins yield greater efficacy estimates than industry-sponsored studies: a meta-analysis.
publisher	Public Library of Science (PLoS)
publishDate	2014
url	https://doaj.org/article/dcc9bf7e8a0c4f7d947c2af9f62876fe
work_keys_str_mv	AT davidkrauth nonindustrysponsoredpreclinicalstudiesonstatinsyieldgreaterefficacyestimatesthanindustrysponsoredstudiesametaanalysis AT andrewanglemyer nonindustrysponsoredpreclinicalstudiesonstatinsyieldgreaterefficacyestimatesthanindustrysponsoredstudiesametaanalysis AT rosephilipps nonindustrysponsoredpreclinicalstudiesonstatinsyieldgreaterefficacyestimatesthanindustrysponsoredstudiesametaanalysis AT lisabero nonindustrysponsoredpreclinicalstudiesonstatinsyieldgreaterefficacyestimatesthanindustrysponsoredstudiesametaanalysis
_version_	1718424883789037568

Nonindustry-sponsored preclinical studies on statins yield greater efficacy estimates than industry-sponsored studies: a meta-analysis.

Ejemplares similares