Trial reportESMO open2020
Safety, tolerability and clinical implementation of 'ready-to-use'
Trial report in ESMO open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Imaging the hallmarks of cancer.Nature reviews. Cancer · 2026Review
- Gallium-Containing Agents for Tumor Diagnosis and Therapy: Current Status and Future Prospects.Small (Weinheim an der Bergstrasse, Germany) · 2026Review
- ScalableWorld journal of nuclear medicine · 2026Article
- Unlocking the potential of tumor-targeting peptides in precision oncology.Oncology research · 2025Review
- [Current radiopharmaceuticals · 2025Article
- [EJNMMI research · 2023Article
- Peptide-Based Agents for Cancer Treatment: Current Applications and Future Directions.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- Good practices forEJNMMI radiopharmacy and chemistry · 2022Review
- AAZTA-Derived Chelators for the Design of Innovative Radiopharmaceuticals with Theranostic Applications.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Cold Kit Labeling: The Future ofFrontiers in medicine · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background
objectivesThis study aimed to assess the safety and tolerability of
methodsA first-in-human phase I/II multicentre, open-label study of a single dose of
resultsTwenty consenting patients were recruited; 14 males, 6 females; mean (SD) age 58 years (12); NET grade 1 (70%), grade 2 (30%); and 75% with stage IV disease. Twelve patients experienced at least one adverse event (AE) during the study with no grade 3-4 toxicities. Only four AEs were classified as possibly (headache (n=1; 4%), nausea (1; 4%)) or probably (dysgeusia (1; 4%), paraesthesia (1; 4%)) related to the study preparation. One hundred thirteen vials of
conclusionsThe new ready-to-use preparation of
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.