ArticleCurrent oncology (Toronto, Ont.)2021
A Canadian Prospective Study of Linkage of Randomized Clinical Trial to Cancer and Mortality Registry Data.
Article in Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00078949 (Phase III Study Of Gemcitabine, Dexamethasone, And Cisplatin Compared To Dexamethasone, Cytarabine, And Cisplatin Plus/Minus Rituximab [), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 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.
Phase III Study Of Gemcitabine, Dexamethasone, And Cisplatin Compared To Dexamethasone, Cytarabine, And Cisplatin Plus/Minus Rituximab [(R)-GDP vs (R)-DHAP] As Salvage Chemotherapy For Patients With Relapsed Or Refractory Aggressive Histology Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma Prior To Autologous Stem Cell Transplant And Followed By Maintenance Rituximab vs Observation
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial
- Contact Days Associated With Cancer Treatments in the CCTG LY.12 Trial.The oncologist · 2023Trial
- The association of health care contact days with economic measures in the CCTG LY.12 trial.The oncologist · 2025Article
- The Past, Present, and Future of Economic Evaluations of Precision Medicine at the Committee for Economic Analyses of the Canadian Cancer Trials Group.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In a prospective study, we sought to determine acceptability of linkage of administrative and clinical trial data among Canadian patients and Research Ethics Boards (REBs). The goal is to develop a more harmonized approach to data, with potential to improve clinical trial conduct through enhanced data quality collected at reduced cost and inconvenience for patients. On completion of the original LY.12 randomized clinical trial in lymphoma (NCT00078949), participants were invited to enrol in the Long-term Innovative Follow-up Extension (LIFE) component. Those consenting to do so provided comprehensive identifying information to facilitate linkage with their administrative data. We prospectively designed a global assessment of this innovative approach to clinical trial follow-up including rates of REB approval and patient consent. The pre-specified benchmark for patient acceptability was 80%. Of 16 REBs who reviewed the research protocol, 14 (89%) provided approval; two in Quebec declined due to small patient numbers. Of 140 patients invited to participate, 115 (82%, 95% CI 76 to 88%) from across 9 Canadian provinces provided consent and their full name, date of birth, health insurance number and postal code to facilitate linkage with their administrative data for long-term follow-up. Linkage of clinical trial and administrative data is feasible and acceptable. Further collaborative work including many stakeholders is required to develop an optimized secure approach to research. A more coordinated national approach to health data could facilitate more rapid testing and identification of new effective treatments across multiple jurisdictions and diseases from diabetes to COVID-19.
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.