In their research article -- A meta-analysis of threats to valid clinical inference in preclinical research of sunitinib-- Henderson et al. find that badly designed studies may lead to the efficacy of drugs being overestimated and money being wasted on trials that prove fruitless.
The researchers looked at all the published animal studies of sunitinib, a cancer drug successfully used to treat advanced kidney cancer, a rare type of stomach cancer and rare tumours of the neuroendocrine system. They found evidence that studies that reported little or no anticancer effect were simply not published, leading anticancer effects of the drug to be overestimated by as much as 45%. Their research is published in the journal eLife.
While the findings do not raise any concerns about the clinical use of sunitinib, they highlight the importance of ensuring that preclinical research can be reproduced by other scientists. Reproducibility helps confirm the validity of results before clinical trials in humans go ahead.
Examples of media coverage featuring this study can be found below:
- Drugs research hampered by substandard animal testing procedures (The Guardian)
- New studies cast further doubt on scientific standards (The Times Higher Education)
- Development of treatments affected by 'poorly designed' animal experiments (Belfast Telegraph)
- Badly-Designed Animal Experiments Might Over Exaggerate Benefits Of New Drugs Trialed (IFLScience)
- Poorly designed animal experiments in the spotlight (Nature)
- Scientists are questioning the way cancer drugs are tested on animals (BT News)
