Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32031692›Full record

ReviewCA: a cancer journal for clinicians2020

An overview of precision oncology basket and umbrella trials for clinicians.

Jay J H Park, Grace Hsu, Ellie G Siden, Kristian Thorlund, Edward J Mills

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in CA: a cancer journal for clinicians, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 124 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
124citing papers in PubMed, 9 pooled it
–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

124 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Challenges in the measurement and valuation of oncological treatments in Spain: recommendations and call to action.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2026
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. A bibliometric analysis of medication studies in congenital heart disease.International journal of cardiology. Congenital heart disease · 2026
    Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

64 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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.

Jay J H ParkExperimental Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Grace HsuDepartment of Health Research Methodology, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Ellie G SidenExperimental Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Kristian ThorlundDepartment of Health Research Methodology, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Edward J MillsDepartment of Health Research Methodology, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-3120-9694

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

With advancements in biomarkers and momentum in precision medicine, biomarker-guided trials such as basket trials and umbrella trials have been developed under the master protocol framework. A master protocol refers to a single, overarching design developed to evaluate multiple hypotheses with the general goal of improving the efficiency of trial evaluation. One type of master protocol is the basket trial, in which a targeted therapy is evaluated for multiple diseases that share common molecular alterations or risk factors that may help predict whether the patients will respond to the given therapy. Another variant of a master protocol is the umbrella trial, in which multiple targeted therapies are evaluated for a single disease that is stratified into multiple subgroups based on different molecular or other predictive risk factors. Both designs follow the core principle of precision medicine-to tailor intervention strategies based on the patient's risk factor(s) that can help predict whether they will respond to a specific treatment. There have been increasing numbers of basket and umbrella trials, but they are still poorly understood. This article reviews common characteristics of basket and umbrella trials, key trials and recent US Food and Drug Administration approvals for precision oncology, and important considerations for clinical readers when critically evaluating future publications on basket trials and umbrella trials and for researchers when designing these clinical trials.

Indexed as

Clinical Trials as TopicHumansMedical OncologyNeoplasmsPrecision MedicineRisk Factorsbasket trialsmaster protocolsprecision medicineprecision oncologyumbrella trials

Identifiers

PMID32031692
PMCPMC7187272

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.