Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26483297›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Clinical oncology2015

Drug repurposing in oncology--patient and health systems opportunities.

Francesco Bertolini, Vikas P Sukhatme, Gauthier Bouche

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Clinical oncology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 161 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
161citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

161 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Approaches to repurposing reverse transcriptase antivirals in cancer.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2025
    Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Old drugs, new challenges: reassigning drugs for cancer therapies.Cellular & molecular biology letters · 2025
    Review
  20. Review

101 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

3 authors.

Francesco BertoliniLaboratory of Hematology-Oncology, European Institute of Oncology, Via Ripamonti 435, 20141 Milan, Italy.
Vikas P SukhatmeBeth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02215, USA.
Gauthier BoucheAnticancer Fund, 1853 Strombeek-Bever, Brussels 1853, Belgium.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In most countries, healthcare service budgets are not likely to support the current explosion in the cost of new oncology drugs. Repurposing the large arsenal of approved, non-anticancer drugs is an attractive strategy to offer more-effective options to patients with cancer, and has the substantial advantages of cheaper, faster and safer preclinical and clinical validation protocols. The potential benefits are so relevant that funding of academically and/or independently driven preclinical and clinical research programmes should be considered at both national and international levels. To date, successes in oncology drug repurposing have been limited, despite strong evidence supporting the use of many different drugs. A lack of financial incentives for drug developers and limited drug development experience within the non-profit sector are key reasons for this lack of success. We discuss these issues and offer solutions to finally seize this opportunity in the interest of patients and societies, globally.

Indexed as

Clinical Trials as TopicHealth PrioritiesAntineoplastic AgentsGlobal HealthHealth Care CostsHumansMedical OncologyNeoplasmsPrecision MedicineAntineoplastic Agents

Identifiers

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.