ArticleJournal of the National Cancer Institute2021
"I Think It's Been Met With a Shrug:" Oncologists' Views Toward and Experiences With Right-to-Try.
Article in Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Perspectives of Academic Oncologists About Offering Expanded Access to Investigational Drugs.JAMA network open · 2022Article
- Early access provision: Awareness, educational needs and opportunities to improve oncology patients' access to care.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
- Physician Responsibility to Discuss Palliative Unproven Therapies With Out-of-Option Patients.The American journal of bioethics : AJOB · 2021Article
- Expanded Access and Right To Try Requests: The Community Oncologist's Experience.JCO oncology practice · 2021Article
- RE: "I Think It's Been Met With a Shrug:" Oncologists' Views Toward and Experiences With Right-to-Try.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2021Article
- Response to Martani, Tomasi, and Casanto.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2021Article
- Article
- A survey of pediatric hematologists/oncologists' perspectives on single patient Expanded Access and Right to Try.Medicine access @ point of careArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe federal Right-to-Try (RTT) Act created an alternate regulatory pathway for preapproval access to investigational drugs. A few studies have examined the experiences of physicians with the Food and Drug Administration's Expanded Access Programs, but to our knowledge, no study has yet to examine their attitudes and experiences toward RTT.
methodsThis study explored the views of 21 oncologists at a major cancer center with 3 main sites across the United States using semi-structured interviews and qualitative analysis. Participants were selected to have experience with Expanded Access Programs.
resultsMost oncologists had limited familiarity with RTT, and several reported confusion about the legislation, including whether patients have a right to investigational drugs and an obligation for companies to provide them. Although oncologists were interested in decreased regulatory burdens, 3 areas of concern were articulated: lack of safety and oversight, unclear structure and no provision for data collection, and potential heightening of patient expectations. Only 4 oncologists had experience discussing RTT, and none formally attempted to obtain the drug through this mechanism. Participants questioned the practicality of RTT legislation and suggested alternative ways to improve access.
conclusionsThe study provides foundational empirical data underlying challenging ambiguities by experienced oncologists familiar with off-trial use of investigational therapeutics and reaffirms the role of physicians and regulatory bodies in mitigating the risks of investigational drugs. Our findings highlight the need for medical centers to inform oncologists about RTT and other preapproval pathways so that they are able to address questions from patients interested in nontrial investigational drugs.
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.