Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32324751›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

Assessment of enrollment characteristics for Children's Oncology Group (COG) upfront therapeutic clinical trials 2004-2015.

Kelly E Faulk, Amy Anderson-Mellies, Myles Cockburn, Adam L Green

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing 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

31 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Body Composition at Diagnosis and Early Response in Pediatric Hodgkin Lymphoma.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

4 authors.

Kelly E FaulkCenter for Cancer and Blood Disorders, Department of Pediatrics, School of Medicine and Children's Hospital Colorado, University of Colorado Aurora, CO, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-8240-7490
Amy Anderson-MelliesUniversity of Colorado Comprehensive Cancer Center, Aurora, CO, United States of America.
Myles CockburnUniversity of Colorado Comprehensive Cancer Center, Aurora, CO, United States of America.
Adam L GreenCenter for Cancer and Blood Disorders, Department of Pediatrics, School of Medicine and Children's Hospital Colorado, University of Colorado Aurora, CO, United States of America.

Funding

NCTN BIQSFP ANBL1531 (NRT)U10CA180886 · NCI · PUBLIC HEALTH INSTITUTE · PI Douglas S. Hawkins · 2014 to 2026
$390.6M
COG SDMC - Statistics CoreU10CA180899 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA · PI TODD A ALONZO · 2014 to 2026
$132.8M
University of Colorado Cancer Center Support Grant - Lung Cancer Patient-Derived Xenografts with Autologous Human Immune SystemsP30CA046934 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO DENVER · PI James V Degregori · 1988 to 2026
$117.0M
Paul Calabresis Award in Clinical Oncology ResearchK12CA086913 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO DENVER · PI VIRGINIA F. BORGES, Jill E Slansky · 2000 to 2026
$17.8M
NCI National Clinical Trials Network - Lead Academic Participating SiteUG1CA233324 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO DENVER · PI ANTHONY D ELIAS · 2019 to 2026
$5.2M
NCI NIH HHS K12 CA086913NCI NIH HHS P30 CA046934NCI NIH HHS U10 CA180886NCI NIH HHS U10 CA180899NCI NIH HHS UG1 CA233324
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundImprovements in pediatric cancer survival are attributed to cooperative clinical trials. Under-representation of specific demographic groups has been described in adult and pediatric cancer trials and poses a threat to the generalizability of results. An evaluation of data provided by the Children's Oncology Group (COG) of upfront trial enrollment for US patients 0 to 29 years old between 2004 and 2015 was performed.

methodsUS cancer cases were estimated using incidence data and US population estimates from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program and compared to observed COG cases. Percent enrollment and standardized ratios of enrollment were calculated across demographic, disease, and socioeconomic groups. The COG website was utilized to quantify available trials and assess age eligibility.

results19.9% of estimated US cancer patients age 0 to 19 years enrolled on COG trials. Younger patients were more represented across diseases and races/ethnicities. Patients with hematologic malignancies were more represented compared to solid and central nervous system (CNS) tumors.

conclusionCOG trial enrollment rates are declining when compared to previously published data, potentially from challenges in pediatric drug development, difficulty designing feasible trials for highly curable diagnoses, and issues ensuring trial availability for the heterogeneous group of solid and CNS tumors. Though racial/ethnic groups and county-level socioeconomic factors were proportionally represented, under representation of the adolescent/young adult (AYA) population and younger patients with solid and CNS tumors remains a concern. Targeted efforts should focus on these subgroups and further research should evaluate AYA enrollment rates across all available trials.

Indexed as

AdolescentAge DistributionChildChild, PreschoolClinical Trials as TopicEthnicityFemaleHumansInfantInfant, NewbornMaleMedical OncologyNeoplasmsRacial GroupsSex DistributionYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID32324751
PMCPMC7179840

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.