Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20406927›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology2010

Ethics of mandatory research biopsy for correlative end points within clinical trials in oncology.

Jeffrey Peppercorn, Iuliana Shapira, Deborah Collyar, Teresa Deshields, Nancy Lin, Ian Krop, Hans Grunwald, Paula Friedman, Ann H Partridge, Richard L Schilsky and 1 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
9.4field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

32 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 76 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Underreporting of Research Biopsies from Clinical Trials in Oncology.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2017
    Article
  10. Burdensome Research Procedures in Trials: Why Less Is More.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2017
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Biopsies: next-generation biospecimens for tailoring therapy.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2013
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jeffrey PeppercornDivision of Medical Oncology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC 27710, USA. jeffrey.peppercorn@duke.edu
Iuliana Shapira
Deborah Collyar
Teresa Deshields
Nancy Lin
Ian Krop
Hans Grunwald
Paula Friedman
Ann H Partridge
Richard L Schilsky
Monica M Bertagnolli
North Shore University Hospital · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Clinical investigators in oncology are increasingly interested in using molecular analysis of cancer tissue to understand the biologic bases of response or resistance to novel interventions and to develop prognostic and predictive biomarkers that will guide clinical decision making. Some scientific questions of this nature can only be addressed, or may best be addressed, through the conduct of a clinical trial in which research biopsies are obtained from all participants. However, trial designs with mandatory research biopsies have raised ethical concerns related to the risk of harm to participants, the adequacy of voluntary informed consent, and the potential for misunderstanding among research participants when access to an experimental intervention is linked to the requirement to undergo a research biopsy. In consideration of the ethical and scientific issues at stake in this debate, the Cancer and Leukemia Group B Ethics Committee proposes guidelines for clinical trials involving mandatory research biopsies. Any cancer clinical trial that requires research biopsies of participants must be well designed to address the scientific question, obtain the biopsy in a way that minimizes risk, and ensure that research participants are fully informed of the risks, rationale, and requirements of the study, as well as of treatment alternatives. Further guidelines and discussions of this issue are specified in this position paper. We feel that if these principles are respected, an informed adult with cancer can both understand and voluntarily consent to participation in a clinical trial involving mandatory research biopsy for scientific end points.

Indexed as

AdultBiopsyClinical Trials as TopicEndpoint DeterminationHumansMandatory TestingMedical Oncology

Identifiers

PMID20406927
PMCPMC5596502
OpenAlexW2030719146

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.