Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33680075›Full record

ArticleEcancermedicalscience2021

Geographic disparities in access to cancer clinical trials in India.

Santam Chakraborty, Indranil Mallick, Hung N Luu, Tapesh Bhattacharyya, Moses Arunsingh, Rimpa Basu Achari, Sanjoy Chatterjee

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ecancermedicalscience, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Uniqueness of lung cancer in Southeast Asia.The Lancet regional health. Southeast Asia · 2024
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Santam ChakrabortyDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Tata Medical Center, Kolkata 700156, India.
Indranil MallickDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Tata Medical Center, Kolkata 700156, India.
Hung N LuuDivision of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, UPMC Hillman Cancer Center, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA 15232, USA.
Tapesh BhattacharyyaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Tata Medical Center, Kolkata 700156, India.
Moses ArunsinghDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Tata Medical Center, Kolkata 700156, India.
Rimpa Basu AchariDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Tata Medical Center, Kolkata 700156, India.
Sanjoy ChatterjeeDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Tata Medical Center, Kolkata 700156, India.
Tata Medical Center · INUPMC Hillman Cancer Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe current study was aimed at quantifying the disparity in geographic access to cancer clinical trials in India.

methodsWe collated data of cancer clinical trials from the Clinical Trial Registry of India and data on state-wise cancer incidence from the Global Burden of Disease Study. The total sample size for each clinical trial was divided by the trial duration to get the sample size per year. This was then divided by the number of states in which accrual was planned to get the sample size per year per state (SSY).For interventional trials investigating a therapy, the SSY was divided by the number of incident cancers in the state to get the SSY per 1,000 incident cancer cases. The SSY data was then mapped to visualise the geographical disparity.

resultsWe identified 181 ongoing studies, of which 132 were interventional studies. There was a substantial inter-state disparity-with a median SSY of 1.55 per 1,000 incident cancer cases (range 0.00-296.81 per 1,000 incident cases) for therapeutic interventional studies. Disparities were starker when cancer site-wise SSY was considered. Even in the state with the highest SSY, only 29.7% of the newly diagnosed cancer cases have an available slot in a therapeutic cancer clinical trial. Disparities in access were also apparent between academic (range: 0.21-226.60) and industry-sponsored trials (range: 0.17-70.21).

conclusionThere are significant geographic disparities in access to cancer clinical trials in India. Future investigations should evaluate the reasons and mitigation approaches for such disparities.

Indexed as

accessclinical trialsdisparitiesgeographyneoplasms

Identifiers

PMID33680075
PMCPMC7929777
OpenAlexW3101125927

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.