Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31988951›Full record

ReviewBiomedicine hub

Precision Medicine: From "Omics" to Economics towards Data-Driven Healthcare - Time for European Transformation.

Denis Lacombe, Lifang Liu, Françoise Meunier, Vassilis Golfinopoulos

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Biomedicine hub. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

4 authors.

Denis LacombeEuropean Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer, Brussels, Belgium.
Lifang LiuEuropean Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer, Brussels, Belgium.
Françoise MeunierEuropean Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer, Brussels, Belgium.
Vassilis GolfinopoulosEuropean Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer, Brussels, Belgium.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is room for improvement for optimally bringing the latest science to the patient while taking into account patient priorities such as quality of life. Too often, regulatory agencies, governments, and funding agencies do not stimulate the integration of research into care and vice versa. Re-engineering the drug development process is a priority, and healthcare systems are long due for transformation. On one hand, patients need efficient access to treatments, but despite precision oncology approaches, efficiently shared screening platforms for sorting patients based on the biology of their tumour for trial access are lacking and, on the other hand, the true value of cancer care is poorly addressed as central questions such as dose, scheduling, duration, and combination are not or sub-optimally addressed by registration trials. Solid evidence on those parameters could potentially lead to a rational and wiser use of anti-cancer treatments. Together, optimally targeting patient population and robust comparative effectiveness data could lead to more affordable and economically sound approaches. The drug development process and healthcare models need to be interconnected through redesigned systems taking into account the full math from drug development into affordable care.

Indexed as

Affordable careDrug developmentOmics

Identifiers

PMID31988951
PMCPMC6945945

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.