Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26114161›Full record

Trial reportJAMA oncology2015

Effect of Unblinding on Participants' Perceptions of Risk and Confidence in a Large Double-Blind Clinical Trial of Chemotherapy for Breast Cancer.

Ann H Partridge, Karen Sepucha, Anne O'Neill, Kathy D Miller, Christine Motley, Ramona F Swaby, Bryan P Schneider, Chau T Dang, Donald W Northfelt, George W Sledge

Abstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in JAMA oncology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 34% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
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

10 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.

Ann H Partridge
Karen Sepucha
Anne O'Neill
Kathy D Miller
Christine Motley
Ramona F Swaby
Bryan P Schneider
Chau T Dang
Donald W Northfelt
George W Sledge
Dana-Farber Cancer Institute · USIndiana University – Purdue University Indianapolis · USIndiana University Melvin and Bren Simon Comprehensive Cancer CenterMassachusetts General Hospital · USMayo Clinic in Arizona · USMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center · USMerck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA (United States) · US

Funding

ECOG-ACRIN NCORP Research Base - TMISTUG1CA189828 · NCI · ECOG-ACRIN MEDICAL RESEARCH FOUNDATION · PI Peter J ODwyer, MITCHELL D. SCHNALL · 2014 to 2026
$199.7M
Project-006U10CA180820 · NCI · ECOG-ACRIN MEDICAL RESEARCH FOUNDATION · PI Peter J ODwyer · 2014 to 2026
$167.6M
ECOG OPERATIONS OFFICE (IBCSG)U10CA021115 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MADISON · PI COMIS, ROBERT L · 1985 to 2013
$132.6M
Statistics CoreU10CA180794 · NCI · DANA-FARBER CANCER INST · PI PAUL J CATALANO · 2014 to 2026
$111.2M
TRANSLATIONAL RESEARCHU10CA025224 · NCI · MAYO CLINIC ROCHESTER · PI BUCKNER, JAN C · 1985 to 2013
$85.0M
ECOG Statistical Office Data Management GrantU10CA066636 · NCI · FRONTIER SCI &TECHNOLOGY RSCH FDN, INC · PI GRAY, ROBERT J · 1994 to 2013
$39.5M
PROVIDE STATISTICAL SERVICESU10CA023318 · NCI · DANA-FARBER CANCER INSTITUTE · PI GRAY, ROBERT J · 1985 to 2013
$33.4M
ONCOLOGYU10CA027525 · NCI · RESEARCH INST OF FOX CHASE CAN CTR · PI GOLDSTEIN, LORI J · 1985 to 2013
$6.2M
CANCER &LEUKEMIA GROUP BU10CA032291 · NCI · DANA-FARBER CANCER INSTITUTE · PI BURSTEIN, HAROLD J. · 1985 to 2013
$5.8M
ONCOLOGYU10CA049883 · NCI · INDIANA UNIV-PURDUE UNIV AT INDIANAPOLIS · PI MILLER, KATHY D. · 1989 to 2013
$4.0M
MEMORIAL HOSPITAL AND CANCER AND ACUTE LEUKEMIA GROUP BU10CA077651 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI HUDIS, CLIFFORD A · 1998 to 2013
$3.2M
Stanford University NCTN- Network Lead Academic SiteU10CA180816 · NCI · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI COUTRE, STEVEN EDWARD, LE, QUYNH-THU XUAN · 2014 to 2018
$2.8M
NCI NIH HHS CA180794NCI NIH HHS CA180795NCI NIH HHS CA180816NCI NIH HHS CA180820NCI NIH HHS CA21115NCI NIH HHS CA23318NCI NIH HHS CA25224NCI NIH HHS CA27525NCI NIH HHS CA33229NCI NIH HHS CA49883NCI NIH HHS CA66636NCI NIH HHS CA77651NCI NIH HHS U10 CA021115NCI NIH HHS U10 CA023318NCI NIH HHS U10 CA025224NCI NIH HHS U10 CA027525NCI NIH HHS U10 CA032291NCI NIH HHS U10 CA049883NCI NIH HHS U10 CA066636NCI NIH HHS U10 CA077651NCI NIH HHS U10 CA180794NCI NIH HHS U10 CA180795NCI NIH HHS U10 CA180816NCI NIH HHS U10 CA180820NCI NIH HHS UG1 CA189828
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

importanceBlinding patients to treatment regimen is an important component of high-quality randomized clinical trials, although concern exists about how receipt of a placebo will affect participants' views, particularly among patients with cancer.

objectiveTo determine whether unblinding of random assignment to placebo vs experimental agent in a large adjuvant breast cancer chemotherapy randomized clinical trial was associated with perception of greater chance of cancer recurrence and lower confidence in the decision to participate in the trial in participants who were randomized to placebo compared with those randomized to experimental therapy. DESIGN, SETTING, AND

participantsSerial telephone-based prospective survey substudy of all Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Protocol 5103 (ECOG5103) participants enrolling between January 5 and June 8, 2010. In ECOG5103, patients were randomized to receive standard adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer with either placebo or bevacizumab for either approximately 6 or approximately 12 months. Treatment assignment was unblinded by 24 weeks, and then patients were surveyed. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Trial participants' self-reported perceived risk of recurrence and confidence in study participation.

resultsOf 571 patients in this substudy who started protocol therapy, 550 were still in the study at unblinding and 492 (89%) responded to the unblinding survey. At unblinding, 336 of 477 (70%) believed that they had at most a small risk of breast cancer recurrence, and 342 of 480 (71%) reported perceiving at most a small risk of serious problem with therapy; most reported feeling very informed (421 of 483 [87%]) and having high levels of confidence in their study participation (420 of 483 [87%]). The 102 participants who learned that they had been randomized to placebo did not have greater perception of chance of recurrence (P = .48) or fear of recurrence (P = .69), feel less informed (P = .86), or have lower confidence in trial participation (P = .31) compared with the 390 participants who had been randomized to experimental therapy. Patients who learned that they had been randomized to bevacizumab perceived higher risk of having a serious problem caused by treatment (P = .01). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In a placebo-controlled, double-blind randomized clinical trial of chemotherapy for breast cancer, unblinding to randomization allocation did not significantly affect most participants' views except for chance of a serious problem from experimental treatment, regardless of receipt of placebo or experimental anticancer therapy along with standard chemotherapy.

Indexed as

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticePerceptionResearch DesignAdultAgedAngiogenesis InhibitorsAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsBevacizumabBreast NeoplasmsChemotherapy, AdjuvantDouble-Blind MethodFemaleHumansInformed ConsentMiddle AgedNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalAngiogenesis InhibitorsBevacizumabPlacebos

Identifiers

PMID26114161
PMCPMC4477538
OpenAlexW1972142948

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.