ArticleAMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science proceedings. AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science2016
How Have Cancer Clinical Trial Eligibility Criteria Evolved Over Time?
Article in AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science proceedings. AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Parsable Clinical Trial Eligibility Criteria Representation Using Natural Language Processing.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2022Article
- A knowledge base of clinical trial eligibility criteria.Journal of biomedical informatics · 2021Article
- Characterization of Comorbidities Limiting the Recruitment of Patients in Early Phase Clinical Trials.The oncologist · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Knowledge reuse of cancer trial designs may benefit from a temporal understanding of the evolution of the target populations of cancer studies over time. Therefore, we conducted a retrospective analysis of the trends of cancer trial eligibility criteria between 1999 and 2014. The yearly distributions of eligibility concepts for chemicals and drugs, procedures, observations, and medical conditions extracted from free-text eligibility criteria of 32,000 clinical trials for 89 cancer types were analyzed. We identified the concepts that trend upwards or downwards in all or selected cancer types, and the concepts that show anomalous trends for some cancers. Later, concept trends were studied in a disease-specific manner and illustrated for breast cancer. Criteria trends observed in this study are also validated and interpreted using evidence from the existing medical literature. This study contributes a method for concept trend analysis and original knowledge of the trends in cancer clinical trial eligibility criteria.
Identifiers
27570681PMC5001741What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.