negative trials not-negative conclusions oncology

The Use of Not-Negative Conclusions to Describe Results of Formally Negative Trials Presented at Oncology Meetings

by Massimo Di Maio, MD, Marco Audisio, MD, Claudia Cardone, MD

Feb 13^th 2020
2 mins
JAMA Oncol. 2020;6(6):926-927

Share This Article

Summary

Out of 208 trials reviewed, 91 were formally negative.
29% (26 trials) had "not-negative" conclusions.
Reasons for "not-negative" conclusions included better numerical outcomes, positive subgroups or secondary endpoints, and non-inferiority reinterpretations.
The study emphasizes the need for caution in presenting such results to prevent misleading interpretations.
Accurate and clear communication in presentations is crucial.
Discussants have a critical role in ensuring transparency and methodological rigor.

Presentations at medical meetings have great resonance within the scientific community, especially following the diffusion of social media. Oral presentations are not subject to peer review, and some authors’ conclusions may not be completely justified by the results. This is particularly critical when, despite the formally negative trial result, the authors’ conclusions are not-negative. The aim of this quality improvement analysis was to describe the frequency and type of not-negative conclusions used by presenters to discuss the results of formally negative trials at recent oncology meetings...

Click for Source Download PDF version

negative trials, not-negative conclusions, oncology