Trial reportJAMA network open2019
Association of National Cancer Institute-Sponsored Clinical Trial Network Group Studies With Guideline Care and New Drug Indications.
Trial report in JAMA network open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.
- Drug Costs in Federally Sponsored Cancer Clinical Trials: A Systematic Review.JAMA network open · 2026Pooled it
- The Outcome and Impact of Academic Cancer Clinical Trials with Participation from Canadian Sites (2015-2024).Cancers · 2025Article
- When to adjust for multiplicity in cancer clinical trials.Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs · 2025Article
- Association of albumin, neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio and lymphocytes with clinical stage in cervical cancer patients.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2025Article
- Patient Enrollment to Industry-Sponsored Versus Federally-Sponsored Cancer Clinical Trials.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2024Article
- Barriers to Clinical Trial Implementation Among Community Care Centers.JAMA network open · 2024Article
- Spending on Phased Clinical Development of Approved Drugs by the US National Institutes of Health Compared With Industry.JAMA health forum · 2023Article
- Population, Clinical, and Scientific Impact of National Cancer Institute's National Clinical Trials Network Treatment Studies.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2023Article
- Creating and Implementing a Principal Investigator Tool Kit for Enhancing Accrual to Late Phase Clinical Trials: Development and Usability Study.JMIR cancer · 2022Article
- Patterns of Scientific and Clinical Impact in Cancer Randomized Clinical Trials.JAMA network open · 2022Article
- Editorial: Global Regulatory Initiatives Deliver Accelerated Approval of the First Bispecific Therapeutic Monoclonal Antibody for Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC).Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2021Article
- Characterizing the relationships between tertiary and community cancer providers: Results from a survey of medical oncologists in Southern California.Cancer medicine · 2021Article
- Exploring new uses for existing drugs: innovative mechanisms to fund independent clinical research.Trials · 2021Article
- Barriers to Participation in Therapeutic Clinical Trials as Perceived by Community Oncologists.JCO oncology practice · 2020Article
- Association of Patient Demographic Characteristics and Insurance Status With Survival in Cancer Randomized Clinical Trials With Positive Findings.JAMA network open · 2020Observational
- Patient burden and clinical advances associated with postapproval monotherapy cancer drug trials: a retrospective cohort study.BMJ open · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Importance: National Cancer Institute Clinical Trial Network (NCTN) groups serve a vital role in identifying effective new antineoplastic regimens. However, the downstream clinical effect of their trials has not been systematically examined. Objective: To examine the association of NCTN trials with guideline care and new drug indications. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study evaluated phase 3 SWOG Cancer Research Network clinical trials from January 1, 1980, through June 30, 2017. Only completed trials with published results were included. To be considered practice influential (PI), a trial must have been associated with guideline care through its inclusion in National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) clinical guidelines or US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) new drug approvals in favor of a recommended treatment. Data were analyzed from June 15, 2018, through March 29, 2019. Main Outcomes and Measures: Estimated overall rate of PI trials, as well as trends over time. The total federal investment supporting the set of trials was also determined. Results: In total, 182 trials consisting of 148 028 patients were studied. Eighty-two studies (45.1%; 95% CI, 37.7%-52.6%) were PI, of which 70 (38.5%) influenced NCCN guidelines, 6 (3.3%) influenced FDA new drug approvals, and 6 (3.3%) influenced both. The number of PI trials was 47 of 65 (72.3%) among those with positive findings and 35 of 117 (29.9%) among those with negative findings. Thus, 35 of 82 PI trials (42.7%) were based on studies with negative findings, with nearly half of these studies (17 of 35 [48.6%]) reaffirming standard of care compared with experimental therapy. The total federal investment spent in conducting the trials was $1.36 billion (2017 US dollars), a rate of $7.5 million per study or $16.6 million per PI trial. Conclusions and Relevance: Nearly half of all phase 3 trials by one of the NCTN's largest groups were associated with guideline care or new drug indications, including those with positive and negative findings. Compared with the costs of a new drug approval in pharmaceutical companies, typically estimated at more than $1 billion, the amount of federal funds invested to provide this valuable evidence was modest. These results suggest that the NCTN program contributes clinically meaningful, cost-efficient evidence to guide patient care.
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.