| ||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
Department of Anesthesiology; Duke University Medical Center; Durham, NC; gan00001{at}mc.duke.edu (Gan) Perioperative Clinical Research Core; Department of Anesthesia and Perioperative Care; University of CA San Francisco Medical Center at Mount Zion; San Francisco, CA (Apfel) University of Kansas Medical Center; Kansas City, KS (Kovac) Department of Anesthesiology; Perioperative and Pain Medicine; Brigham and Womens Hospital; Boston, MA (Philip) Huntington Memorial Hospital; Clinical Management Services, Inc.; Pasadena, CA (Singla) Memorial Hermann Memorial City Hospital; Houston, TX (Minkowitz) Duke University Medical Center; Durham, NC (Habib) Merck Research Laboratories; North Wales, PA (Carides, Horgan, Evans, Lawson)
In Response:
We appreciate the opportunity to respond to the letter (1) concerning the article by Gan et al. (2) on aprepitant for prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting. There are a number of points in this letter that require clarification.
Data quality management and analyses were conducted by the sponsor. The decision to exclude efficacy data from a single study site was made by the sponsor before unblinding, based upon a thorough, standard, objective audit in accordance with the obligation of sponsors as outlined in the Code of Federal Regulations, 21CFR312.56 (http://www.gpoaccess.gov/cfr/index.html). Analyses of the primary endpoint with and without the excluded site were outlined before study unblinding. These were performed concurrently at the time of the initial analysis and before the submission of the manuscript for publication, and were submitted to FDA along with the Supplemental New Drug Application. Inclusion or exclusion of data from the site did not influence the study results. The original submitted draft of the article explained what data were excluded, and why. There has been no lack of transparency. All authors believe that appropriate procedures were followed.
Consistent with the requirements of International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (http://www.icmje.org), the authors of the paper were offered the opportunity to review the data at the sponsors data repository. The primary author reviewed the data and was satisfied with its integrity, as well as the appropriateness of the analyses.
Named authors reviewed the manuscript. The intent behind listing "Aprepitant-PONV Study Group" on the byline was to acknowledge the efforts of the entire group involved in performing the study; nonnamed members of the group were not authors and did not review the paper.
We must emphasize our firm belief in adherence to the principles of collaboration, integrity of the peer-review process, accuracy of scientific measurements, and transparent reporting of clinical trial results.
REFERENCES
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|