Transparency and credibility of industry-sponsored clinical trial publications: a survey of journal editors.

To examine how medical journal editors perceive changes in transparency and credibility of industry-sponsored clinical trial publications over a 5 year period (2010 to 2015). From July to September 2015, a survey link was emailed to journal editors identified from the Thomson Reuters registry. Editors ranked their perception of: a) change in transparency and credibility of industry-sponsored clinical trial publications; b) 8 "Publication Best Practices" and the impact of each on transparency; and c) the importance and adoption of the previously published "10 Recommendations for Closing the Credibility Gap in Reporting Industry-Sponsored Clinical Research".

Cross-sectional study of Pfizer-sponsored clinical trials: assessment of time to publication and publication history.

Objective: To estimate the proportion of Pfizer-sponsored clinical trials that completed in 2010 and are published as manuscripts in the peer-reviewed literature, and to assess the manuscript development history.

Design: Retrospective, cross-sectional analysis.

Setting: Clinical trials registered in ClinicalTrials.

Good Publication Practice for Communicating Company-Sponsored Medical Research: GPP3.

This updated Good Publication Practice (GPP) guideline, known as GPP3, builds on earlier versions and provides recommendations for individuals and organizations that contribute to the publication of research results sponsored or supported by pharmaceutical, medical device, diagnostics, and biotechnology companies. The recommendations are designed to help individuals and organizations maintain ethical and transparent publication practices and comply with legal and regulatory requirements. These recommendations cover publications in peer-reviewed journals and presentations (oral or poster) at scientific congresses.

Five-step authorship framework to improve transparency in disclosing contributors to industry-sponsored clinical trial publications.

Authorship guidelines have established criteria to guide author selection based on significance of contribution and helped to define associated responsibilities and accountabilities for the published findings. However, low awareness, variable interpretation, and inconsistent application of these guidelines can lead to confusion and a lack of transparency when recognizing those who merit authorship. This article describes a research project led by the Medical Publishing Insights and Practices (MPIP) Initiative to identify current challenges when determining authorship for industry-sponsored clinical trials and develop an improved approach to facilitate decision-making when recognizing authors from related publications.

Authors' Submission Toolkit: a practical guide to getting your research published.

Biomedical journals and the pharmaceutical industry share the goals of enhancing transparency and expanding access to peer-reviewed research; both industries have recently instituted new policies and guidelines to effect this change. However, while increasing transparency may elevate standards and bring benefits to readers, it will drive a significant increase in manuscript volume, posing challenges to both the journals and industry sponsors. As a result, there is a need to: (1) increase efficiency in the submission process to accommodate the rising manuscript volume and reduce the resource demands on journals, peer reviewers, and authors; and (2) identify suitable venues to publish this research.

Antioxidant vitamin supplementation reduces benzo(a)pyrene-DNA adducts and potential cancer risk in female smokers.

Background: Elevated benzo(a)pyrene [B(a)P]-DNA adducts have been associated with 3-fold increased risk of lung cancer in current smokers. We assessed the chemopreventive effects of antioxidant supplementation using B(a)P-DNA adducts in leukocytes as an intermediate cancer risk marker.

Methods: Subjects were randomized to a double-blinded placebo-controlled clinical trial of antioxidant vitamin supplementation [500 mg vitamin C and 400 IU vitamin E (dl-alpha-tocopherol) daily] or placebo.

Associations between carcinogen-DNA damage, glutathione S-transferase genotypes, and risk of lung cancer in the prospective Physicians' Health Cohort Study.

DNA damage from polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) and other aromatic/hydrophobic compounds has been implicated in case-control studies as a risk factor for lung cancer, as have common polymorphisms in the glutathione S-transferase (GST) genes involved in carcinogen detoxification. However, their joint effects have not been evaluated in prospective studies, leaving open questions about predictive value of these biomarkers. In this matched case-control study nested within the prospective Physicians' Health Study, we evaluated whether biomarkers measured in white blood cells (WBC) significantly predicted risk, alone and in combination, after controlling for level of smoking.