Skip to Main content Skip to Navigation

Méthodologie et qualité du reporting des études en oncologie (essais de phase II et études observationnelles)

Abstract : Cancer remains a major public health problem in France : This pathology is the leading cause of death, with nearly 150,000 deaths each year. In order to fight against this disease, the 2014-2019 French cancer plan set the goal of developing clinical research, including at least 50,000 patients per year in 2019 in therapeutic trials. Clinical research in oncology has been booming since the advent of therapies such as targeted molecular therapies or immunotherapy. The number of new drugs being developed in oncology has increased exponentially since the 2000s, resulting in a significant increase in the number of oncology study publications. The analysis of a study is possible only if its experimental design, its realization and its conditions of analysis are clearly described in the published article. Reporting is the process of describing in a publication all the actions, including methodological ones, carried out during the study. 5 systematic reviews were conducted to analyze the reporting of oncology study articles. The first study showed that the literature was poor in articles analyzing the reporting of observational studies (2% of publications) and that the intrinsic reporting of recent systematic reviews on the subject was exhaustive (average OQSR score (2010-2014) = 10, standard deviation = 2). 826 articles of study were analyzed in the second systematic review, 84.5% of which were observational studies. The reporting of the variables and the primary endpoint were clear in 100% and 85.2% of the cases, respectively. A reporting discrepancy for the main statistical test used, between the Methods and Results parts, was identified in 23 articles. The third systematic review revealed a lack of data on the reporting of phase II trials in oncology (13 articles) and 3 reporting evaluation scores were described: OQS, KMS and quality index score. 557 phase II trial publications were reviewed in the fourth systematic review. The KMS reporting score was 0, 1, 2, 3 respectively for 3.9%, 21.4%, 48.5% and 26.2% publications. In multivariate analysis, the 3 variables associated with the KMS score were : Reporting of a clear statistical design (OR = 2.22, 95% CI [1.36-3.65], p <0.001), the single-center trial (OR = 0.25 [0.09 - 0.74], p = 0.012) and per protocol analysis (OR = 0.48, 95% CI [0.32-0.72], p <0.001). The last systematic review focused on 557 Phase II trial articles. 182 Phase II trials (32.7%) resulted in a Phase III trial, of which 57 had a positive and statistically significant primary endpoint. In conclusion, reporting of studies in oncology remains perfectible. Optimization points identified are the development of specific reporting recommendations for phase II trials in oncology and the adherence of all medical journals to the various reporting recommendations
Document type :
Complete list of metadatas
Contributor : Abes Star :  Contact
Submitted on : Tuesday, June 2, 2020 - 1:19:47 AM
Last modification on : Tuesday, June 2, 2020 - 3:54:18 AM


Version validated by the jury (STAR)


  • HAL Id : tel-02724796, version 2



Romain Rivoirard. Méthodologie et qualité du reporting des études en oncologie (essais de phase II et études observationnelles). Médecine humaine et pathologie. Université de Lyon, 2019. Français. ⟨NNT : 2019LYSE1151⟩. ⟨tel-02724796v2⟩



Record views


Files downloads