Search

Adherence to study registration and reporting best practices is vital to fostering evidence-based medicine. All registered clinical trials on ClinicalTrials.gov conducted in Canada as of 2009 and completed by 2019 were identified. A cross-sectional analysis of those trials assessed prospective registration, subsequent result reporting in the registry, and subsequent publication of study findings. The lead sponsor, phase of study, clinical trial site location, total patient enrollment, number of arms, type of masking, type of allocation, year of completion, and patient demographics were examined as potential effect modifiers to these best practices. A total of 6720 trials were identified. From 2009 to 2019, 59% (n = 3,967) of them were registered prospectively, and 32% (n = 2138) had neither their results reported nor their findings published. Of the 3763 trials conducted exclusively in Canada, 3% (n = 123) met all three criteria of prospective registration, reporting in the registry, and publishing findings. Overall, the odds of having adherence to all three practices concurrently in Canadian trials decrease by 95% when compared with international trials. Canadian clinical trials substantially lacked adherence to study registration and reporting best practices. Knowledge of this widespread non-compliance should motivate stakeholders in the Canadian clinical trial ecosystem to address and continue to monitor this problem.

We present the case of a 28-year-old woman who presented with nonspecific symptoms with a high-sensitivity troponin I level > 10,000 ng/L, which led to extensive investigations and a hospital stay. Follow-up testing using an alternate troponin assay yielded undetectable levels. Two years later, the patient had a high-sensitivity troponin I level > 1500 ng/L, with experiments confirming the presence of a macrocomplex. We advocate for communication with laboratory professionals to expedite identification of macrotroponin complexes, so that patients and clinicians can reduce the number of unwarranted investigations. Novel teaching points include the importance of identifying macrocomplexes as a source of persistent false elevations and ensuring that a process is instituted to investigate troponin-level elevations when false-positive results are suspected. Résumé: Nous décrivons le cas d’une femme de 28 ans qui présentait des symptômes non spécifiques et un taux de troponine I mesuré par dosage ultrasensible s’élevant à plus de 10 000 ng/l, ce qui a mené à des investigations poussées et à une hospitalisation. Lors d’analyses de suivi avec une mesure alternative de la troponine, les taux étaient indétectables. Deux ans plus tard, le taux de troponine I mesuré par dosage ultrasensible était supérieur à 1500 ng/l chez cette patiente, et des analyses ont confirmé la présence d’un macrocomplexe. Nous préconisons une communication avec les professionnels de laboratoire pour accélérer la détection de complexes de macrotroponine, afin de permettre aux cliniciens de diminuer le nombre d’investigations qui ne sont pas nécessaires chez les patients. Les points d’enseignements les plus récents insistent sur l’importance de détecter les macrocomplexes qui pourraient être à l’origine des taux de troponine faussement élevés persistants et de s’assurer qu’un processus soit mis en place pour investiguer les élévations du taux de troponine lorsque des résultats faussement positifs sont suspectés.