ArticleESMO open2016
The European Society for Medical Oncology Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale in daily practice: a single institution, real-life experience at the Medical University of Vienna.
Article in ESMO open, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Benefit of standard systemic treatments of solid tumours in Australia varies by indication, tumour stream, and treatment modality.ESMO real world data and digital oncology · 2025Article
- Physicians' Perception of the Evidence in Relation to Primary Endpoints of Clinical Trials on Breast Cancer.Breast care (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Measuring Quality of Life in Ovarian Cancer Clinical Trials-Can We Improve Objectivity and Cross Trial Comparisons?Cancers · 2020Review
- [Radium-223 for the treatment of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) : The androgen receptor-independent active agent in the therapeutic sequence].Der Urologe. Ausg. A · 2020Review
- Measuring the Value of New Drugs: Validity and Reliability of 4 Value Assessment Frameworks in the Oncology Setting.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2017Article
- Article
- One year ofESMO open · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (MCBS) has been designed to stratify the therapeutic benefit of a certain drug registered for the treatment of cancer. However, though internally validated, this tool has not yet been evaluated for its feasibility in the daily practice of a major center of medical oncology.
methodsThe practicability of the MCBS for advanced oncological diseases at the Clinical Division of Oncology, Medical University of Vienna, which constitutes one of the largest oncological centres in Europe, was analysed in a three-step approach. First, retrospectively collected data were analysed to gain an overview of treatments in regular use. Second, data were scored by using the MCBS. Third, the ensuing results were evaluated within corresponding programme directorships to assess feasibility in a real-life clinical context.
resultsIn the majority of tumour entities, the MCBS results reported earlier are consistent with daily clinical practice. Thus, in metastatic breast cancer or advanced lung cancer, there was a high level of clinical benefit for first-line treatment standards, and these results reflected well real-life experience. However, analyses based on the first version of the MCBS are limited if it comes to salvage treatment in tumour entities in which optimal sequencing of potential treatment options is of major importance, as in metastatic colorectal or renal cell cancer. In contrast to this, it is remarkable that certain novel therapies such as nivolumab assessed for heavily pretreated advanced renal cancer reached the highest level of clinical benefit due to prolongation in survival and a favourable toxicity profile. The MCBS clearly underlines the potential benefit of these compounds.
conclusionsThe MCBS is an excellent tool for daily clinical practice of a tertiary referral centre. It supports treatment decisions based on the clinical benefit to be expected from a novel approach such as immunotherapy in as yet untested indications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.