Proposed best practice for statisticians in the reporting and publication of pharmaceutical industry-sponsored clinical trials

In this paper we set out what we consider to be a set of best practices for statisticians in the reporting of pharmaceutical industry-sponsored clinical trials. We make eight recommendations covering: author responsibilities and recognition; publication timing; conflicts of interest; freedom to act; full author access to data; trial registration and independent review. These recommendations are made in the context of the prominent role played by statisticians in the design, conduct, analysis and reporting of pharmaceutical sponsored trials and the perception of the reporting of these trials in the wider community.

The potential for bias in reporting of industry-sponsored clinical trials

Concerns about potentially misleading reporting of pharmaceutical industry research have surfaced many times. The potential for duality (and thereby conflict) of interest is only too clear when you consider the sums of money required for the discovery, development and commercialization of new medicines. As the ability of major, mid-size and small pharmaceutical companies to innovate has waned, as evidenced by the seemingly relentless decline in the numbers of new medicines approved by Food and Drug Administration and European Medicines Agency year-on-year, not only has the cost per new approved medicine risen: so too has the public and media concern about the extent to which the pharmaceutical industry is open and honest about the efficacy, safety and quality of the drugs we manufacture and sell. In 2005 an Editorial in Journal of the American Medical Association made clear that, so great was their concern about misleading reporting of industry-sponsored studies, henceforth no article would be published that was not also guaranteed by independent statistical analysis. We examine the precursors to this Editorial, as well as its immediate and lasting effects for statisticians, for the manner in which statistical analysis is carried out, and for the industry more generally.

The Identity of the St Bees Lady, Cumbria: An Osteobiographical Approach

Using an Osteobiographical approach, this contribution considers the identity of the woman found alongside the St Bees Man, one of the best-preserved archaeological bodies ever discovered. Osteological, isotopic and radiocarbon analyses, combined with the archaeological context of the burial and documented social history, provide the basis for the identification of a late 14th-century heiress whose activities were at the heart of medieval northern English geopolitics.

Influence of the Photorhabdus luminescens phosphomannose isomerase gene, manA, on mannose utilization, exopolysaccharide structure, and biofilm formation

Extracellular polysaccharide (EPS) is produced by diverse bacterial pathogens and fulfills assorted roles, including providing a structural matrix for biofilm formation and more specific functions in virulence, such as protection against immune defenses. We report here the first investigation of some of the genes important for biofilm formation in Photorhabdus luminescens and demonstrate the key role of the phosphomannose isomerase gene, manA, in the structure of functional EPS. Phenotypic analyses of a manA-deficient mutant showed the importance of EPS in motility, insect virulence, and biofilm formation on abiotic surfaces as well as the requirement of this gene for the use of mannose as the sole carbon source. Conversely, this defect had no apparent impact on symbiosis with the heterorhabditid nematode vector. A more detailed analysis of biofilm formation revealed that the manA mutant was able to attach to surfaces with the same efficiency as that of the wild-type strain but could not develop the more extended biofilm matrix structures. A compositional analysis of P. luminescens EPS reveals how the manA mutation has a major effect on the formation of a complete, branched EPS.

Uncertainty in climate change impacts on basin-scale freshwater resources – preface to the special issue: the QUEST-GSI methodology and synthesis of results

This paper presents a preface to this Special Issue on the results of the QUEST-GSI (Global Scale Impacts) project on climate change impacts on catchment-scale water resources. A detailed description of the unified methodology, subsequently used in all studies in this issue, is provided. The project method involved running simulations of catchment-scale hydrology using a unified set of past and future climate scenarios, to enable a consistent analysis of the climate impacts around the globe. These scenarios include "policy-relevant" prescribed warming scenarios. This is followed by a synthesis of the key findings. Overall, the studies indicate that in most basins the models project substantial changes to river flow, beyond that observed in the historical record, but that in many cases there is considerable uncertainty in the magnitude and sign of the projected changes. The implications of this for adaptation activities are discussed.

A comparative analysis of projected impacts of climate change on river runoff from global and catchment-scale hydrological models

We present a comparative analysis of projected impacts of climate change on river runoff from two types of distributed hydrological model, a global hydrological model (GHM) and catchment-scale hydrological models (CHM). Analyses are conducted for six catchments that are global in coverage and feature strong contrasts in spatial scale as well as climatic and development conditions. These include the Liard (Canada), Mekong (SE Asia), Okavango (SW Africa), Rio Grande (Brazil), Xiangu (China) and Harper's Brook (UK). A single GHM (Mac-PDM.09) is applied to all catchments whilst different CHMs are applied for each catchment. The CHMs typically simulate water resources impacts based on a more explicit representation of catchment water resources than that available from the GHM, and the CHMs include river routing. Simulations of average annual runoff, mean monthly runoff and high (Q5) and low (Q95) monthly runoff under baseline (1961-1990) and climate change scenarios are presented. We compare the simulated runoff response of each hydrological model to (1) prescribed increases in global mean temperature from the HadCM3 climate model and (2)a prescribed increase in global-mean temperature of 2oC for seven GCMs to explore response to climate model and structural uncertainty. We find that differences in projected changes of mean annual runoff between the two types of hydrological model can be substantial for a given GCM, and they are generally larger for indicators of high and low flow. However, they are relatively small in comparison to the range of projections across the seven GCMs. Hence, for the six catchments and seven GCMs we considered, climate model structural uncertainty is greater than the uncertainty associated with the type of hydrological model applied. Moreover, shifts in the seasonal cycle of runoff with climate change are presented similarly by both hydrological models, although for some catchments the monthly timing of high and low flows differs.This implies that for studies that seek to quantify and assess the role of climate model uncertainty on catchment-scale runoff, it may be equally as feasible to apply a GHM as it is to apply a CHM, especially when climate modelling uncertainty across the range of available GCMs is as large as it currently is. Whilst the GHM is able to represent the broad climate change signal that is represented by the CHMs, we find, however, that for some catchments there are differences between GHMs and CHMs in mean annual runoff due to differences in potential evaporation estimation methods, in the representation of the seasonality of runoff, and in the magnitude of changes in extreme monthly runoff, all of which have implications for future water management issues.