Clinical trials in context
This article was originally published in The Tan Sheet
Executive SummaryRandomized clinical trials presented in five major medical journals in 2001 show "no evidence of progress" in discussing results "within the context of, or with reference to, up-to-date systematic reviews of relevant evidence from other controlled trials" when compared with studies published in 1997, Mike Clarke, et al., UK Cochrane Centre, conclude in June 5 JAMA. In an issue devoted to peer review, the authors looked at discussion sections of 30 studies published in JAMA, Annals of Internal Medicine, British Medical Journal, The Lancet or NEJM...
You may also be interested in...
The amyloid-targeting drug is years behind Biogen/Eisai’s aducanumab, but its subcutaneous administration and the GRADUATE studies’ design could give Roche’s gantenerumab an advantage.
Correvio's atrial fibrillation drug Brinavess will return to a US FDA advisory committee more than a decade after the agency first declined to approve the drug; FDA still has a series of cardiovascular safety concerns related to the drug and is not convinced by data from the European experience.
FerGene bladder cancer therapy achieved a complete response in more than half of patients in its pivotal trial. The joint venture now looks to commercialization and potential expansion of indications.