Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32239146›Full record

ArticleJournal of the National Cancer Institute2020

Proportion of Patients in Phase I Oncology Trials Receiving Treatments That Are Ultimately Approved.

Sean X Zhang, Dean Fergusson, Jonathan Kimmelman

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Dose optimization during drug development: whether and when to optimize.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2023
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. 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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Sean X ZhangStudies of Translation, Ethics, and Medicine, Biomedical Ethics Unit, McGill University, Montreal, Canada.
Dean FergussonOttawa Hospital Research Institute, Department of Medicine, Surgery, and the School of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada.
Jonathan KimmelmanStudies of Translation, Ethics, and Medicine, Biomedical Ethics Unit, McGill University, Montreal, Canada.
McGill University · CAUniversity of Ottawa · CA

Funding

CIHR
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPhase I oncology trials are often regarded as a therapeutic option for patients. However, such claims have relied on surrogate measures of benefit, such as objective response.

methodsUsing a systematic search of publications, we assessed the therapeutic value of phase I cancer trial participation by determining the probability that patients will receive active doses of treatments that eventually receive FDA approval or a National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guideline recommendation for their indication. ClinicalTrials.gov, PubMed, American Society of Clinical Oncology reports, NCCN guidelines, and Drugs@FDA were searched between May 1, 2018, and July 31, 2018. All statistical tests were 2-sided.

resultsA total of 1000 phase I oncology trials initiated between 2005 and 2010 and enrolling 32 582 patients were randomly sampled from 3229 eligible trials on ClinicalTrials.gov. A total of 386 (1.2%) patients received a treatment that was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for their malignancy at a dose delivered in the trial; including NCCN guideline recommendations, the number and proportion are 1168 (3.6%). Meta-regression showed a statistically significantly greater proportion of patients receiving a drug that was ultimately FDA approved in biomarker trials (rate ratio = 4.49, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.53 to 13.23; P = .006) and single-indication trials (rate ratio = 3.32, 95% CI = 1.21 to 9.15; P  = .02); proportions were statistically significantly lower for combination vs monotherapy trials (rate ratio = 0.09, 95% CI = 0.01 to 0.68; P  = .02).

conclusionsOne in 83 patients in phase I cancer trials received a treatment that was approved for their indication at the doses received. Given published estimates of serious adverse event rates of 10%-19%, this represents low therapeutic value for phase I trial participation.

Indexed as

Antineoplastic Agents, ImmunologicalAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsClinical Trials, Phase I as TopicCohort StudiesDrug ApprovalDrug DevelopmentDrugs, InvestigationalFemaleHumansMaleMedical OncologyNeoplasmsUnited StatesUnited States Food and Drug AdministrationAntineoplastic Agents, ImmunologicalDrugs, Investigational

Identifiers

PMID32239146
PMCPMC7492767
OpenAlexW3014751745

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.