Publication status of 95 clinical trials of 3 COVID-19 vaccines developed by Chinese companies: An observational cohort study

Till Bruckner, Yixuan Chen, Carolina Cruz, Christie Ebube Dike, Belen Chavarria, Shiyu Chen, Ernest Dela Dzidzornu
{"title":"Publication status of 95 clinical trials of 3 COVID-19 vaccines developed by Chinese companies: An observational cohort study","authors":"Till Bruckner, Yixuan Chen, Carolina Cruz, Christie Ebube Dike, Belen Chavarria, Shiyu Chen, Ernest Dela Dzidzornu","doi":"10.1101/2024.03.17.24304386","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Transparency shortcomings can undermine confidence in the safety and efficacy of vaccines. This study assesses the publication status of 95 clinical trials of 3 COVID-19 vaccines developed by Chinese companies that received a World Health Organization Emergency Use Listing (EUL) and have been marketed globally. We searched trial registries and the scientific literature to assess current trial status and the public availability of results. After excluding 2 withdrawn trials, we found that at least 62/93 trials (67%) involving 307,933 patients had verifiably been completed or terminated. Only 44 of those 62 trials (71%) had published results in a peer-reviewed journal; none had tabular summary results available on a trial registry. The results of 18/62 (29%) verifiably completed or terminated trials remained unpublished. The trial status information stated in trial registries was often incorrect. Our findings reveal a substantial gap between the disclosure practices of the 3 Chinese companies and global best practice benchmarks. Transparency and global public trust in Chinese biopharmaceutical products could be improved by aligning Chinese legal disclosure requirements with those prevalent in more mature markets, or by the voluntary adoption of stronger transparency practices by Chinese companies.","PeriodicalId":501386,"journal":{"name":"medRxiv - Health Policy","volume":"58 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"medRxiv - Health Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.03.17.24304386","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Transparency shortcomings can undermine confidence in the safety and efficacy of vaccines. This study assesses the publication status of 95 clinical trials of 3 COVID-19 vaccines developed by Chinese companies that received a World Health Organization Emergency Use Listing (EUL) and have been marketed globally. We searched trial registries and the scientific literature to assess current trial status and the public availability of results. After excluding 2 withdrawn trials, we found that at least 62/93 trials (67%) involving 307,933 patients had verifiably been completed or terminated. Only 44 of those 62 trials (71%) had published results in a peer-reviewed journal; none had tabular summary results available on a trial registry. The results of 18/62 (29%) verifiably completed or terminated trials remained unpublished. The trial status information stated in trial registries was often incorrect. Our findings reveal a substantial gap between the disclosure practices of the 3 Chinese companies and global best practice benchmarks. Transparency and global public trust in Chinese biopharmaceutical products could be improved by aligning Chinese legal disclosure requirements with those prevalent in more mature markets, or by the voluntary adoption of stronger transparency practices by Chinese companies.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
中国企业研发的3种COVID-19疫苗的95项临床试验的发表情况:观察性队列研究
透明度不足会削弱人们对疫苗安全性和有效性的信心。本研究评估了由中国公司开发的 3 种 COVID-19 疫苗的 95 项临床试验的公布情况,这些疫苗已获得世界卫生组织的紧急使用许可 (EUL),并已在全球上市。我们检索了试验登记册和科学文献,以评估当前的试验状态和结果的公开性。在排除了 2 项撤销的试验后,我们发现至少有 62/93 项试验(67%)(涉及 307933 名患者)已经完成或终止。在这 62 项试验中,只有 44 项(71%)在同行评议期刊上发表了结果;没有一项试验的结果汇总表可在试验登记册上查阅。18/62(29%)项经核实已完成或终止的试验结果仍未公布。试验登记表中的试验状态信息往往不正确。我们的研究结果表明,这三家中国公司的信息披露实践与全球最佳实践基准之间存在巨大差距。如果中国的法律信息披露要求与更成熟的市场相一致,或者中国企业自愿采用更强的透明度实践,那么中国生物制药产品的透明度和全球公众对中国生物制药产品的信任度都会得到提高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
"WE CAN ALL CONTRIBUTE IN OUR OWN WAY" : KNOWLEDGE MOBILIZATION TOOLS TO PROMOTE BEST PRACTICES IN UNIVERSAL ACCESSIBILITY Geospatial Analysis of the Association between Medicaid Ex-pansion, Minimum Wage Policies, and Alzheimer's Disease Dementia Prevalence in the United States The clinical and cost-effectiveness of interventions for preventing continence issues resulting from birth trauma: a rapid review Supporting women, girls and people who menstruate to participate in physical activity - Rapid evidence summary Performance of the Washington Group Questions in Measuring Blindness and Deafness
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1