Proven efficacy, equitable access, and adjusted pricing of anti-cancer therapies: no 'sweetheart' solution.

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.

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.

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

1. From Diagnostic-Therapeutic Pathways to Real-World Data: A Multicenter Prospective Study on Upfront Treatment forThe oncologist · 2019
   Observational
2. Global cancer control: responding to the growing burden, rising costs and inequalities in access.ESMO open · 2018
   Article
3. Me, Too.Journal of global oncology · 2016
   Article
4. Cheaper Options in the Prevention of Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting.Journal of global oncology · 2016
   Review
5. ESMO open · 2016
   Article
6. ESMO - Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale V.1.0 questions and answers.ESMO open · 2016
   Review

Corrections and comments

• Comment on
  A standardised, generic, validated approach to stratify the magnitude of clinical benefit that can be anticipated from anti-cancer therapies: the European Society for Medical Oncology Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS).2015

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as