ArticleJournal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network : JNCCN2020
Performance Status Restriction in Phase III Cancer Clinical Trials.
Article in Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network : JNCCN, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 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
26 citing papers in PubMed.
- External Validation of the ARCAD Nomogram in a Real-World Cohort with Stage 4 Colorectal Cancer.Cancers · 2026Article
- The correlation between pain and function in cancer survivors.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026Article
- Chemotherapy for Older Adults with Locally Advanced or Metastatic Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Unveiling Factors Associated With Older Adult Accrual to Cancer Clinical Trials: Lessons From the ECOG-ACRIN Experience.Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network : JNCCN · 2025Article
- Article
- Older Adult Participation in Early-Phase Lung Cancer Clinical Trials, 1998 to 2020.JTO clinical and research reports · 2025Article
- Association between physical activity, performance scores, and clinical trial enrollment in cancer survivors.BMC cancer · 2025Article
- Performance status eligibility requirements and enrollment characteristics in cancer clinical trials leading to US Food and Drug Administration drugs approval (2009-2023).European journal of cancer (Oxford, England : 1990) · 2025Article
- Exclusion of people from oncology clinical trials based on functional status.Clinical trials (London, England) · 2025Article
- Article
- The role of social, economic, and medical marginalization in cancer clinical trial participation inequities: A systematic review.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2025Review
- Differences in immune-related toxicity between PD-1 and PD-L1 inhibitors: a retrospective cohort study in patients with advanced cancer.Cancer immunology, immunotherapy : CII · 2024Article
- Article
- Exploring the discrepancies between clinical trials and real-world data: A small-cell lung cancer study.Clinical and translational science · 2024Article
- Mobility Assessment Instruments.Seminars in oncology nursing · 2024Review
- Clinical trials in older patients with cancer - typical challenges, possible solutions, and a paradigm of study design in breast cancer.Acta oncologica (Stockholm, Sweden) · 2024Review
- Pan-cancer analyses of the associations between 109 pre-existing conditions and cancer treatment patterns across 19 adult cancers.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Challenges, Complexities, and Considerations in the Design and Interpretation of Late-Phase Oncology Trials.Seminars in radiation oncology · 2023Review
- Article
- First-Line Pembrolizumab Plus Chemotherapy for Advanced Squamous NSCLC: Real-World Outcomes at U.S. Oncology Practices.JTO clinical and research reports · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
22 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPatients with good performance status (PS) tend to be favored in randomized clinical trials (RCTs), possibly limiting the generalizability of trial findings. We aimed to characterize trial-related factors associated with the use of PS eligibility criteria and analyze patient accrual breakdown by PS.
methodsAdult, therapeutic, multiarm phase III cancer-specific RCTs were identified through ClinicalTrials.gov. PS data were extracted from articles. Trials with a PS restriction ECOG score ≤1 were identified. Factors associated with PS restriction were determined, and the use of PS restrictions was analyzed over time.
resultsIn total, 600 trials were included and 238,213 patients had PS data. Of those trials, 527 studies (87.8%) specified a PS restriction cutoff, with 237 (39.5%) having a strict inclusion criterion (ECOG PS ≤1). Enrollment criteria restrictions based on PS (ECOG PS ≤1) were more common among industry-supported trials (P<.001) and lung cancer trials (P<.001). Nearly half of trials that led to FDA approval included strict PS restrictions. Most patients enrolled across all trials had an ECOG PS of 0 to 1 (96.3%). Even among trials that allowed patients with ECOG PS ≥2, only 8.1% of those enrolled had a poor PS. Trials of lung, breast, gastrointestinal, and genitourinary cancers all included <5% of patients with poor PS. Finally, only 4.7% of patients enrolled in trials that led to subsequent FDA approval had poor PS.
conclusionsUse of PS restrictions in oncologic RCTs is pervasive, and exceedingly few patients with poor PS are enrolled. The selective accrual of healthier patients has the potential to severely limit and bias trial results. Future trials should consider a wider cancer population with close toxicity monitoring to ensure the generalizability of results while maintaining patient safety.
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.