Press Releases of Drug-Related Randomized Trial Results Prior to Publication in High-Impact Journals: an Observational Study.

IMPORTANCE: Results from high-profile randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are routinely reported through press release months prior to peer-reviewed publication. There are potential benefits to press releases (e.g., knowledge dissemination, ensuring regulatory compliance), but also potential drawbacks (e.g., selective reporting, positive "spin"). OBJECTIVE: To characterize the practice of press release predating the publication of a drug-related RCT in a peer-reviewed journal ("preemptive press release"), including factors associated with this practice. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We systematically reviewed all RCTs of medications published between 2015 and 2019 in the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), and Lancet. Press releases were identified using a systematic search of the grey literature (e.g., press release databases, study sponsor websites). An RCT was considered to have a preemptive press release if the press release was published at least three months (90 days) prior to the date of publication in a peer-reviewed journal. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Presence of preemptive press release, defined as a press-release at least 90 days prior to the date of publication in a peer-reviewed journal. As secondary measures for dissemination, we also assessed citation count and Altmetric score. RESULTS: We identified 988 RCTs, of which 172 (17%) had a press release published at least 90 days before the date of peer-reviewed publication. Press releases were published a median of 246 days (interquartile range [IQR] 169-366 days) before publication in a peer-reviewed journal. In the multivariable logistic regression model, the strongest predictor of having a preemptive press release was funding by a pharmaceutical company (odds ratio 13, 95% CI 7, 25). Approximately 85% of RCTs with preemptive press releases had a positive primary outcome and, concordantly, 81% of the corresponding press releases had a positive headline. Multivariable regression models identified studies with a preemptive press release had a similar Altmetric score (median - 15, 95% CI - 33, 12) and higher median citation count (median 22 [95% CI 10 to 33] compared to studies without a preemptive press release. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Preemptive press releases were common, most often issued for trials funded by a pharmaceutical company, and typically preceded publication in a peer-reviewed journal by approximately eight months.

Impact of presentation at conference with timed release of academic publication.

Fast-tracking publication of original research to coincide with a conference presentation ("coordinated publication") is a mechanism of rapidly disseminating new data. How often this occurs, whether its frequency is changing, and the impact of this approach on information dissemination, is unknown. Our objective was to describe the characteristics of coordinated publications, how the practice has changed over time, and evaluate its potential impact on dissemination of study results. We conducted a cross-sectional study of randomized controlled trials published in NEJM, Lancet, and JAMA between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2019. Among the 1533 included randomized controlled trials, 502 (33%) had coordinated publications. Coordinated publications increased from 30% [n = 94] in 2015 to 37% [n = 136] in 2019. Coordinated publications were more likely to be unblinded (61% [n = 305] vs. 52% [n = 532]) and more likely to be funded by industry (50% [n = 249] vs. 30% [n = 311]). The strongest predictor of a coordinated publication was cardiovascular disease subspecialty (OR = 3.96, 95% CI [2.95, 5.36]). The median number of citations (188 vs. 98) and the median Altmetric score (318 vs. 182) were higher for coordinated publications than non-coordinated publications. These differences persisted in a multivariable regression model. Coordinated publication is increasingly common. While coordinated publications may generate greater attention, they were observed to be more likely to be unblinded and more likely to be funded by industry, raising questions about the value and intentions of such promotion.

Canadian Gastroenterology Career Pathway Experiences: Exploring the Gender Divide.

Background: We aimed to determine the persistence of differential career experiences between male and female gastroenterologists in Canada >20 years after they were first noted in the literature. Methods: A 51-question mixed-methods survey was developed focusing on personal, professional and financial characteristics. The survey was disseminated via email and fax to practicing gastroenterologists using provincial college registries and the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology. Numerical data were analyzed using the chi-square test. Qualitative thematic analysis was conducted for short answer responses. Findings: There were a total of 114 responses (17% response rate) with 35% female respondents. Mean age was 49 years for males and 41 years for females (P = 0.001). Clinical practice types included general GI (63%), urban (82%) and academic (51%). Males reported more endoscopy time (P = 0.001) versus females who spent more time on research (P < 0.001). Men were more likely to be married (P = 0.011), but women were more likely to be responsible for childcare (P = 0.016). Women were more likely to choose between marriage and career and more chose marriage compared to men (P = 0.045). Males earned >$100,000/year higher income than females even when offset by age and work hours (P = 0.048). A salary >$600,000 was reported by 32% of men, compared to 3% of women. Female gastroenterologists reported less mentorship during GI training, challenging relationships with support staff, reduced promotion opportunity, more difficulty publishing and having their competency challenged. Interpretation: Compared to previous data, there has not been significant gender-related progress in the past two decades regarding female gastroenterologists' clinical practices, remuneration and work-life balance.

Canadian Consensus Statements on the Transition of Adolescents and Young Adults with Inflammatory Bowel Disease from Pediatric to Adult Care: A Collaborative Initiative Between the Canadian IBD Transition Network and Crohn's and Colitis Canada.

Objectives: With the increased prevalence of childhood-onset inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), there is a greater need for a planned transition process for adolescents and young adults (AYA). The Canadian IBD Transition Network and Crohn's and Colitis Canada joined in collaborative efforts to describe a set of care consensus statements to provide a framework for transitioning AYA from pediatric to adult care. Methods: Consensus statements were drafted after focus group meetings and literature reviews. An expert panel consisting of 20 IBD physicians, nurses, surgeon, adolescent medicine physician, as well as patient and caregiver representatives met, discussed and systematically voted. The consensus was reached when greater than 75% of members voted in agreement. When greater than 75% of members rated strong support, the statement was rendered a strong recommendation, suggesting that a clinician should implement the statement for all or most of their clinical practice. Results: The Canadian expert panel generated 15 consensus statements (9 strong and 6 weak recommendations). Areas of focus of the statements included: transition program implementation, key stakeholders, areas of potential need and gaps in the research. Conclusions: These consensus statements provide a framework for the transition process. The quality of evidence for these statements was generally low, highlighting the need for further controlled studies to investigate and better define effective strategies for transition in pediatric to adult IBD care.

Systematic review of hematuria and acute renal failure with tranexamic acid.

OBJECTIVES: To conduct a systematic review of tranexamic acid (TXA) and the risk of renal failure from urinary clots in adult patients with hematuria. METHODS: A systematic review of Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov, and Google Scholar were searched. Randomized control trials (RCTs) and observational studies that assessed the risk of renal failure with use of TXA among adults with hematuria were included. The primary outcome was renal failure due to urinary tract clots with TXA compared to no TXA (or placebo) or comparator. RESULTS: We identified three RCTs (N = 466 patients) and three retrospective cohort studies (N=220 patients), and a total of 342 patients that had hematuria and received TXA. The patient population of the six studies included medical and surgical patients, with two of the three RCTs comprised patients undergoing percutaneous nephrolithotomy, and the third RCT comprised patients undergoing transurethral resection of the prostate. Documentation of renal function before and after TXA administration was documented in only two studies (N = 28 patients), and neither identified worsening renal function in those exposed to TXA. CONCLUSIONS: There are limited studies evaluating the risk of renal failure in patients with hematuria who were exposed to TXA, and the available data does not suggest an increased risk.