Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33122353›Full record

Trial reportESMO open2020

Evaluation of the contribution of randomised cancer clinical trials evaluating agents without documented single-agent activity.

Jared Foster, Boris Freidlin, E L Korn, Malcolm Smith

Abstract readClinical Trial, Phase IIRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in ESMO open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Combination Early-Phase Trials of Anticancer Agents in Children and Adolescents.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2023
    Review
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.

Jared FosterBiometric Research Program, Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland, USA. Electronic address: jared.foster@nih.gov.
Boris FreidlinBiometric Research Program, Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.
E L KornBiometric Research Program, Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.
Malcolm SmithCancer Therapy Evaluation Program, Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWith the development of targeted agents, the approach to combination cancer therapy has evolved to focus on identifying ways in which pathway inhibition by one agent may enhance the activity of other agents. In theory, this implies that under this new paradigm, agents are no longer required to show single-agent activity, as the pathway inhibited by the targeted agent may only have a therapeutic effect when given with other agents. This raises the question of the extent to which anticancer agents without single-agent activity can contribute to effective combination regimens. PATIENTS AND

methodsWe reviewed outcomes of randomised phase 2 combination trials sponsored by the National Cancer Institute Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program that were activated in 2008 to 2017 and noted the single-agent activity of the experimental agents.

resultsFifty-three trials were identified, and 50 had available results: 7 (14%), 15 (30%) and 28 (56%) had experimental agents with single-agent activity classified as active, inactive and indeterminate, respectively. Thirteen per cent (95% CI=1.7% to 40.5%) of trials evaluating inactive agents and 11.6% (95% CI=3.9% to 25.1%) of trials evaluating agents without known single-agent activity (pooled inactive and indeterminate) were positive, compared with 42.9% (95% CI=9.9% to 81.6%) for agents with single-agent activity.

conclusionsIncorporating agents without documented single-agent activity into treatment regimens is unlikely to produce meaningful improvements in activity unless there is compelling biological rationale. This finding has important implications for the prioritisation of anticancer agents for combination testing, and for the allocation of clinical trial resources.

Indexed as

Antineoplastic AgentsNeoplasmsHumansAntineoplastic Agentsclinical trialscombination therapydrug development

Identifiers

PMID33122353
PMCPMC7597487

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.