Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26950524›Full record

ArticleJournal of veterinary internal medicine

Conduct, Oversight, and Ethical Considerations of Clinical Trials in Companion Animals with Cancer: Report of a Workshop on Best Practice Recommendations.

R Page, P Baneux, D Vail, L Duda, P Olson, L Anestidou, N Dybdal, G Golab, W Shelton, M Salgaller and 1 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of veterinary internal medicine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
–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

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Safety of alternate-day treatment with TS-1The Journal of veterinary medical science · 2021
    Article
  10. Histopathological evaluation ofVeterinary world · 2021
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Questioning the Use of Zika Virus Injection in Dogs with Advanced-Stage Brain Tumors.Molecular therapy : the journal of the American Society of Gene Therapy · 2021
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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.

R PageFlint Animal Cancer Center, College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO.
P BaneuxCornell University, Ithaca, NY.
D VailSchool of Veterinary Medicine, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI.
L DudaSchool of Veterinary Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA.
P OlsonOlson Consulting, Animal Health and Welfare, Fort Collins, CO.
L AnestidouInstitute for Laboratory Animal Research, National Academy of Sciences, Washington, DC.
N DybdalGenentech, Inc., South San Francisco, CA.
G GolabAmerican Veterinary Medical Association, Schaumburg, IL.
W SheltonVirtual Beast Consulting, San Mateo, CA.
M SalgallerThe Conafay Group, Washington, DC.
C HardyFlint Animal Cancer Center, College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Development of effective and safe treatments for companion animals with cancer requires the collaboration of numerous animal health professionals and the full engagement of animal owners. Establishing 'Best Practice Recommendations' for clinical trials in veterinary oncology represents an important step toward meeting the goal of rigorous clinical trial design and conduct that is required to establish valid evidence. Likewise, optimizing patient welfare and owner education and advocacy is crucial to meet the unique ethical obligations to both owners and animals enrolled in these clinical trials and to ensure trust in the team conducting the research. To date, 'Best Practice Recommendations' for clinical trial conduct have not been reported for veterinary oncology. This document summarizes the consensus of a workshop held in November, 2014 to identify relevant ethical principles and to ensure responsible conduct of clinical research in companion animals with cancer. It is intended as a working document that will be updated as advances in science and ethical considerations require. To the extent possible, existing guidelines for the conduct and oversight of clinical trials in humans have been adapted for veterinary trials to avoid duplicative effort and to facilitate integration of clinical trials such that translational research with benefits for both companion animals and humans are encouraged.

Indexed as

PetsAnimalsAntineoplastic AgentsBioethicsClinical Trials as TopicEthics, ResearchNeoplasmsPractice Guidelines as TopicResearch DesignAntineoplastic AgentsEthicsOncologyPatient welfareTreatments

Identifiers

PMID26950524
PMCPMC4913608

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.