ArticleThe oncologist2020
Patients' Understanding of Oncology Clinical Endpoints: Environmental Scan and Focus Groups.
Article in The oncologist, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Patient Understanding of Oncology Clinical Trial Endpoints in Direct-to-Consumer Television Advertising.The oncologist · 2023Trial
- Navigating the Prescription Drug Information System.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2026Review
- (Neo)adjuvant approvals for solid tumors by the US Food and Drug Administration 2010-2023.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2026Article
- FDA Accelerated Approval Disclosures on Direct-to-Consumer Prescription Drug Websites: Testing Presence, Prominence, and Wording.Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science · 2026Article
- Article
- Decoding clinical trial jargon: helping people understand the efficacy end points used in cancer trials.Future oncology (London, England) · 2025Article
- Outcomes that matter to patients with cancer: living longer and living better.EClinicalMedicine · 2024Review
- The Development of the Oncology Center of Excellence Patient-Friendly Language Glossary of Oncology Clinical Trial Terms.The oncologist · 2023Article
- Communication of anticancer drug benefits and related uncertainties to patients and clinicians: document analysis of regulated information on prescription drugs in Europe.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2023Article
- Physicians' use of and preferences for FDA-approved prescribing information.Research in social & administrative pharmacy : RSAP · 2022Article
- Redefining the Treatment Endpoints in Oncology.The oncologist · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUnderstanding treatment options is important for patients with cancer and their caregivers. This may be difficult, however, because oncology treatments are often approved based on complex clinical endpoints. The study aimed to explore lay understanding of oncology clinical endpoints by assessing the definitions of clinical endpoints available online and gathering qualitative focus group data on cancer survivors' and the general public's understanding of clinical endpoints.
methodsWe conducted an environmental scan to find Web sites accessible by a general audience that defined three clinical endpoints: overall survival, progression-free survival, and response rate. Next, we conducted a series of eight focus groups across the U.S. with cancer survivors (n = 36) and general population adults (n = 36).
resultsWe found several online resources defining each endpoint; however, many of the definitions we identified used technical language that may not be easily understood by patients and caregivers. Few focus group participants were familiar with the technical terms for these endpoints. When presented with the endpoint terms and definitions, participants had misconceptions about treatment efficacy. Specifically, they tended to expect that all endpoints were a variation on living longer.
conclusionThe results point to the need for more patient-friendly definitions of clinical endpoints developed with input from the general public and from patients with cancer. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: As the number of oncology prescription drug approvals and the advertising of those drugs to consumers increase, it is timely and critical to understand how to discuss treatment benefits with patients. Patient-friendly definitions of common clinical endpoints, such as overall survival and progression-free survival, would help health care providers describe treatment benefits to patients. This research provides evidence regarding patients' understanding of these endpoints and suggests definitions for additional research. This represents a first step in creating evidence-based patient-friendly language to describe clinical endpoints.
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.