Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30069667›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2018

Pharmacovigilance in oncology.

Paolo Baldo, Giulia Fornasier, Laura Ciolfi, Ivana Sartor, Sara Francescon

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing 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

24 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Adverse drug reactions associated with doxorubicin and epirubicin: A descriptive analysis from VigiBase.Journal of oncology pharmacy practice : official publication of the International Society of Oncology Pharmacy Practitioners · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Patterns of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor prophylaxis in patients with cancer receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2020
    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

5 authors.

Paolo BaldoPharmacy Unit, CRO Aviano IRCCS, National Cancer Institute, Aviano, Italy. pbaldo@cro.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5106-7120
Giulia FornasierPharmacy Unit, CRO Aviano IRCCS, National Cancer Institute, Aviano, Italy.
Laura CiolfiScientific and Patients' Library, CRO Aviano IRCCS, National Cancer Institute, Aviano, Italy.
Ivana SartorScientific Direction, Clinical Trial Office Unit, CRO Aviano IRCCS, National Cancer Institute, Aviano, Italy.
Sara FrancesconPharmacy Unit, CRO Aviano IRCCS, National Cancer Institute, Aviano, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background Side effects of cancer therapy are one of the most important issues faced by cancer patients during their illness. Pharmacovigilance, namely the science and activities aimed at monitoring the safety of drugs, is particularly important in oncology, due to the intrinsic biologic toxicity of antineoplastic agents, their narrow therapeutic windows, and the high doses and rigid timing of treatment regimens. Aim of the review To identify the main issues in carrying out an effective pharmacovigilance activity in oncology. Method We searched PubMed for articles about pharmacovigilance in relation to chemotherapy, radiotherapy and targeted therapy for cancer, using MeSH terms and text words. We also searched Embase, CINAHL, Scopus, Micromedex, the Cochrane Library, two pharmacovigilance databases and the gray literature for articles published in 2012-2018. Overall, 137 articles were considered potentially relevant and were critically appraised independently by two authors, leading to the inclusion of 44 relevant studies, guidelines and reviews. Another 10 important research reports were included in the review. Results Eight critical issues of pharmacovigilance in oncology were identified. These issues pertain to: terminology; range of side effects; targeted therapy and immunotherapy; chemoradiotherapy; generic drugs and biosimilars; drug interactions, pharmacogenetics and polypharmacy; special patient categories; and under-reporting of ADRs. Conclusion The importance of pharmacovigilance in oncology must be highlighted with every effort, to improve safety and offer cancer patients every possible help to improve their quality of life during such a critical period of their lives.

Indexed as

Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting SystemsMedical OncologyPharmacovigilanceAntineoplastic AgentsDrug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsHumansPatient SafetyRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsAntineoplastic AgentsAdverse drug reactionsCancerCytotoxic chemotherapyNeoplasmsOncologyPharmacovigilanceRadiotherapySafetyTargeted therapyToxicity

Identifiers

PMID30069667
PMCPMC6132974

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.