Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31751330›Full record

ArticlePLoS medicine2019

Noncompletion and nonpublication of trials studying rare diseases: A cross-sectional analysis.

Chris A Rees, Natalie Pica, Michael C Monuteaux, Florence T Bourgeois

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 50 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
50citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

50 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Time to publication for results of clinical trials.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Capturing the experiences of patients with inherited optic neuropathies: a systematic review of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and qualitative studies.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2022
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Caregiver Meaningful Score Differences and Meaningful Score Regions for the Observer-Reported Communication Ability Measure for Individuals with Angelman Syndrome.Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Economic burden of Sanfilippo syndrome in the United States.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2025
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Re-envisioning clinical trial design in systemic sclerosis.Expert review of clinical immunology · 2025
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Chris A ReesDivision of Emergency Medicine, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-6449-0377
Natalie PicaDepartment of Pediatrics, Children's National Medical Center, The George Washington School of Medicine & Health Science, Washington, DC, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-9633-2891
Michael C MonuteauxDivision of Emergency Medicine, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America.
Florence T BourgeoisDivision of Emergency Medicine, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-7798-4560

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRare diseases affect as many as 60 million people in the United States and Europe. However, most rare diseases lack effective therapies and are in critical need of clinical research. Our objective was to determine the frequency of noncompletion and nonpublication of trials studying rare diseases. METHODS AND

findingsWe conducted a cross-sectional analysis of randomized clinical trials studying rare diseases as defined by the Genetic and Rare Disease Information Center database that were registered in ClinicalTrials.gov between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2012, and completed or discontinued by December 31, 2014. Our main outcome measures were the frequency of trial noncompletion and, among completed studies, frequency of trial nonpublication at 2 and 4 years following trial completion. Reasons for discontinuation were extracted from the registry, and trial sponsors were contacted for additional information, as needed. Two independent investigators performed publication searches for each trial in PubMed, EMBASE, and GoogleScholar, allowing for a minimum of 45 months between trial completion and publication. When a publication could not be identified, trial sponsors were contacted to confirm publication status. The impact of funding source on trial noncompletion was assessed with multivariable logistic regression, and the effect on time to publication was examined with Cox proportional hazards regression. Control variables included intervention type, trial phase, masking, enrollment, and study population. We analyzed 659 rare disease trials accounting for 70,305 enrolled patients. Industry was the primary funder for 327 trials (49.6%) and academic institutions for 184 trials (27.9%). There were 79 trials (12.0%) focused on pediatric populations. A total of 199 trials (30.2%) were discontinued. Lack of patient accrual (n = 64, 32.1%) and informative termination (n = 41, 20.6%) were the most common reasons for trial noncompletion. Among completed trials, 306 (66.5%) remained unpublished at 2 years and 142 (31.5%) at 4 years. In multivariable analyses, industry-funded trials were less likely to be discontinued than trials funded by healthcare centers (odds ratio [OR] 2.42; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.34-4.39, P = 0.003). We found no significant association between funding source and time to publication. A total of 18,148 patients were enrolled in trials that were discontinued or unpublished 4 years after completion. A potential limitation of our study is that certain interventional trials for rare diseases may not have been registered in ClinicalTrials.gov, in particular Phase 0 and Phase I trials, which are not required to be registered.

conclusionsIn this study, over half of clinical trials initiated for rare diseases were either discontinued or not published 4 years after completion, resulting in large numbers of patients with rare diseases exposed to interventions that did not lead to informative findings. Concerted efforts are needed to ensure that participation of patients in rare disease trials advances scientific knowledge and treatments for rare diseases.

Indexed as

Clinical Trials as TopicCross-Sectional StudiesDatabases, FactualHumansLogistic ModelsManuscripts as TopicOdds RatioPublicationsPublishingRare DiseasesRegistriesResearch DesignUnited States

Identifiers

PMID31751330
PMCPMC6871779

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.