Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34286890›Full record

ArticleThe oncologist2021

Analyses of the Rationale and Implementation of Research Biopsies in Oncology Clinical Trials at a Tertiary Cancer Center.

Nathalie Olympios, Laetitia Collet, Marianne Paesmans, Christiane Jungels, Nuria Kotecki, Ahmad Awada, Philippe Aftimos

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The oncologist, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Nathalie Olympios *Medical Oncology Clinic, Institut Jules Bordet, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-3943-3730
Laetitia Collet *Medical Oncology Clinic, Institut Jules Bordet, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.
Marianne PaesmansData Centre, Institut Jules Bordet, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.
Christiane JungelsMedical Oncology Clinic, Institut Jules Bordet, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.
Nuria KoteckiMedical Oncology Clinic, Institut Jules Bordet, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.
Ahmad AwadaMedical Oncology Clinic, Institut Jules Bordet, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.
Philippe AftimosMedical Oncology Clinic, Institut Jules Bordet, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBiomarkers in clinical trials have led to massive incorporation of research biopsies, with potentially risks and no direct benefit for patients. In 2018, the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) released an ethical framework to provide guidance on incorporating research biopsies in cancer clinical trials. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe collected biopsy requirements of cancer clinical trials conducted at Institut Jules Bordet (IJB) between 2015 and 2019 to examine adherence with the ASCO Ethical Framework. We used logistic regression models to test the association between the request for biopsy, the request for tissue, and the adherence to the ASCO framework as well as some trial characteristics.

resultsBetween January 2015 and December 2019, 178 oncological studies were conducted at IJB. Of these, 138 (78%) were sponsored by industry, 132 (74%) were phase II and III studies, and 141 (79%) concerned metastatic disease. Tissue was required for inclusion for 119 (67%) studies, among which 59 required at least one new biopsy. Adherence to ASCO's Ethical Framework was 67% for studies requiring tissue and went down to 39% for studies requiring at least one new biopsy. In multivariate analysis, requests for tissue or new biopsies increased in early-phase studies (p < .001, p < .001, respectively) and in studies investigating innovative treatments (immunotherapy or targeted therapies; p < .01, p = .02). Compliance to the ASCO framework significantly decreased with time (p < .001) and in early-phase studies (p < .001).

conclusionNumerous studies required tissue or new biopsies for exploratory objectives of unknown clinical utility. Requests for tissue increased over the years, whereas compliance to ASCO's Ethical Framework decreased. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: In 2019, the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) developed an ethical framework to provide guidance on incorporating research biopsies in clinical trials. This study underlines the growing request for tissue in clinical trials with potentially no impact on drug development and no benefit to actual or future patients. Adherence to ASCO's Ethical Framework decreases through time. These results highlight the importance of improving the ethics of research biopsies. ASCO's Ethical Framework offers an opportunity to improve quality of care in clinical research by maximizing scientific utility and allowing for clinically meaningful correlative science and safe access to innovative treatments for a maximum number of patients.

Indexed as

Medical OncologyNeoplasmsBiopsyHumansBiopsyClinical trialMedical oncologyResearch ethics

Identifiers

PMID34286890
PMCPMC8649004

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.