Scientific Publications Database

Article Title: Assessing the Completeness of Reporting in Preclinical Oncolytic Virus Therapy Studies
Authors: Fergusson, Dean A.; Wesch, Neil L.; Leung, Garvin J.; MacNeil, Jenna L.; Conic, Isidora; Presseau, Justin; Cobey, Kelly D.; Diallo, Jean-Simon; Auer, Rebecca; Kimmelman, Jonathan; Kekre, Natasha; El-Sayes, Nader; Krishnan, Ramya; Keller, Brian A.; Ilkow, Carolina; Lalu, Manoj M.
Journal: MOLECULAR THERAPY-ONCOLYTICS Volume 14
Date of Publication:2019
Abstract:
Irreproducibility of preclinical findings could be a significant barrier to the bench-to-bedside development of oncolytic viruses (OVs). A contributing factor is the incomplete and non-transparent reporting of study methodology and design. Using the NIH Principles and Guidelines for Reporting Preclinical Research, a core set of seven recommendations, we evaluated the completeness of reporting of preclinical OV studies. We also developed an evidence map identifying the current trends in OV research. A systematic search of MEDLINE and Embase identified all relevant articles published over an 18 month period. We screened 1,554 articles, and 236 met our a priori-defined inclusion criteria. Adenovirus (43%) was the most commonly used viral platform. Frequently investigated cancers included colorectal (14%), skin (12%), and breast (11%). Xenograft implantation (61%) in mice (96%) was the most common animal model. The use of preclinical reporting guidelines was listed in 0.4% of articles. Biological and technical replicates were completely reported in 1% of studies, statistics in 49%, randomization in 1%, blinding in 2%, sample size estimation in 0%, and inclusion/exclusion criteria in 0%. Overall, completeness of reporting in the preclinical OV therapy literature is poor. This may hinder efforts to interpret, replicate, and ultimately translate promising preclinical OV findings.