Operational complexity predicts selective non-dissemination within pharmaceutical sponsor portfolios: a retrospective cohort study
Sayed, A. M.; Huan, P. T.; Nguyen, T. K.; Fathy, E.; Aziz, T.; Tho, D. V.; Huy, N. T.
Show abstract
BackgroundIncomplete dissemination of clinical trial results remains an important challenge for research transparency and evidence synthesis. Although prior studies have quantified the overall extent of non-dissemination, less is known about whether trial characteristics observable at registration are associated with subsequent dissemination within sponsor portfolios. Methods and findingsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study of 17,537 completed interventional clinical trials registered on ClinicalTrials.gov between 2007 and 2024 across the 20 largest global pharmaceutical companies. We developed the Operational Complexity Index (OCI), a composite measure derived from planned enrollment, facility count, and geographic scope, and examined its association with trial dissemination using multivariable logistic regression and time-to-event analyses. Higher OCI was associated with greater odds of dissemination (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 2.40, 95% CI 2.23-2.60; p < 0.001), with dissemination increasing from 47% in the lowest OCI decile to 95% in the highest. Higher operational complexity was also associated with earlier dissemination; over a 1,095-day horizon, high-OCI trials were disseminated a mean of 310.88 days earlier than low-OCI trials (RMST difference, 310.88 days; 95% CI 300.59-320.96; p < 0.001). This pattern was observed across sponsors, clinical phases, and therapeutic areas. In predictive analyses using registration-time variables, the structural model achieved a cross- validated AUC of 0.816 and a holdout AUC of 0.814, whereas the full model, including sponsor identity, achieved a cross-validated AUC of 0.858 and a holdout AUC of 0.857. Using benchmark phase-based costing assumptions, the 5,019 non-disseminated trials corresponded to an estimated US$10.94-15.26 billion in sunk research investment. ConclusionsAmong trials conducted by the 20 largest pharmaceutical sponsors, greater operational complexity at registration was associated with a higher likelihood of dissemination and earlier dissemination. These findings suggest that aggregate sponsor-level transparency metrics may mask important heterogeneity within sponsor portfolios. Future work should assess whether registration-time trial characteristics can help identify trial subgroups at higher risk of non-dissemination. AUTHOR SUMMARYO_ST_ABSWhy was this study done?C_ST_ABSO_LIIncomplete dissemination of clinical trial results reduces the completeness of the medical evidence base and the public value of research participation. C_LIO_LIPrevious studies have described overall rates of trial non-dissemination, but less is known about whether dissemination varies systematically across different types of trials within sponsor portfolios. C_LIO_LIWe examined whether trial characteristics available at registration were associated with later dissemination of results among large pharmaceutical sponsors. C_LI What did the researchers do and find?O_LIWe analyzed 17,537 completed interventional clinical trials sponsored by the 20 largest pharmaceutical companies and registered on ClinicalTrials.gov between 2007 and 2024. C_LIO_LIWe developed an Operational Complexity Index (OCI) based on planned enrollment, number of facilities, and geographic scope to measure trial operational scale at registration. C_LIO_LIHigher OCI was associated with a greater likelihood of dissemination and earlier dissemination. Dissemination ranged from 47% in the lowest OCI decile to 95% in the highest. C_LIO_LIThis pattern was observed across sponsor portfolios, clinical phases, and therapeutic areas, with an average within-sponsor dissemination gap of 40 percentage points between lower- and higher-complexity trials. C_LIO_LIIn manual validation of 344 sampled trials, the automated dissemination-classification pipeline achieved 92.1% accuracy. C_LIO_LIUsing benchmark phase-based costing assumptions, the 5,019 non-disseminated trials corresponded to an estimated US$10.9-15.3 billion in sunk research investment. C_LI What do these findings mean?O_LIDissemination was not uniform across trial types within sponsor portfolios; trials with lower operational complexity were less likely to be disseminated than trials with higher operational complexity. C_LIO_LIAggregate sponsor-level transparency measures may therefore miss important differences within portfolios. C_LIO_LIRegistration-time trial characteristics showed predictive signal for non-dissemination, but whether such information could support monitoring strategies would require prospective validation. C_LIO_LIMore complete dissemination of trial results would strengthen the scientific record and improve the public value of clinical research. C_LI
Matching journals
The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Dynamic methods for ongoing assessment of site-level risk in risk-based monitoring of clinical trials: a scoping review 93%
- Design and implementation of the multi-arm, multi-stage Therapeutics for Inpatients with COVID-19 (TICO) platform master protocol: An Accelerating COVID-19 Therapeutic Interventions and Vaccines (ACTIV) initiative 92%
- Evidence Supporting EMA Drug Approvals (2020-2023): A Cross-Sectional Study of Trial Design and Outcomes 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Results reporting for clinical trials led by medical universities and university hospitals in the Nordic countries was often missing or delayed 95%
- Results dissemination from clinical trials conducted at German university medical centres was delayed and incomplete 94%
- Strength of Statistical Evidence for the Efficacy of Cancer Drugs: A Bayesian Re-Analysis of Trials Supporting FDA Approval 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- How Informative Were Early SARS-CoV-2 Treatment and Prevention Trials? A longitudinal cohort analysis of trials registered on clinicaltrials.gov 95%
- Exploring scalable assessment methods for terminated trials in ClinicalTrials.gov: A cohort analysis of German and Californian trials 94%
- Analysis of clinical trial registry entry histories using the novel R package cthist 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Improving research transparency with individualized report cards: A feasibility study in clinical trials at a large university medical center 95%
- Investigator-initiated versus industry-sponsored trials – Visibility and relevance of randomized controlled trials in clinical practice guidelines (IMPACT) 92%
- Approaches in Analyzing Predictors of Trial Failure: A Scoping Review and Meta-epidemiological study 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Trials that turn from retrospectively registered to prospectively registered: A cohort study of ‘retroactively prospective’ clinical trial registration using history data 95%
- Registration, Publication, and Outcome Reporting among Pivotal Clinical Trials that Supported FDA Approval of High-Risk Medical Devices Before and After FDAAA 91%
- UKCTOCS Update: Applying insights of delayed effects in cancer screening trials to the long-term follow-up mortality analysis 90%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.