ArticleTranslational lung cancer research2021
The Chinese Thoracic Oncology Group (CTONG) therapeutic option scoring system: a multiple-parameter framework to assess the value of lung cancer treatment options.
Article in Translational lung cancer research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Comprehensive Mapping of Real-World Studies and Data Sources for Oncology in China: Insights into Landscape, Challenges, and Future Direction.Oncology and therapy · 2026Review
- Precision targeted therapy for EGFR mutation-positive NSCLC: Dilemmas and coping strategies.Thoracic cancer · 2023Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCurrently, there is no standard context that conforms to the Chinese national framework for evaluating medical decisions regarding the treatment of lung cancer.
methodsThis draft was formulated after a systematic review and a focus group discussion among 20 experts, who were senior physicians with extensive clinical experience from the Chinese Thoracic Oncology Group (CTONG) task force. Subsequently, a draft and a five-point Likert scale were sent to 300 CTONG working group members. These were modified according to feedback from a four-round modified Delphi approach. Hence, the first version of the 'Therapeutic option of lung cancer: CTONG scoring system' was formulated. Afterward, a corresponding questionnaire was designed to collect opinions on the weight allocation of various indicators. This was issued through the WeChat platform, "Oncology News" application and e-mails from October 23, 2020, to November 25, 2020. Participants from numerous occupations in cancer-related fields from various regions of China were included in the study. Overall and subgroup analyses regarding weight allocations were performed. The differences between participant-allocated and reference weights were considered to adjust the framework.
resultsThe framework contained four aspects and six indicators, including efficacy [progression-free survival (PFS)/overall survival (OS) and subsequent treatment], safety [treatment-related severe adverse event (SAE), dose adjustment], quality of life (Qol), and compensation. The reference weights were 50%, 5%, 10%, 5%, 10%, and 20% for each indicator. By November 25, 2020, 1,043 valid questionnaires had been obtained. The majority of the questionnaires were completed by physicians (86.5%). Subgroup analysis among the various groups showed an overall consistent trend. Besides, significant differences between the participant-allocated and reference weights were found among PFS/OS (difference: -11.5%), compensation (difference: -10.1%), and subsequent treatment (difference: 9.7%) indicators. After discussion, the final weight allocations were set at 45%, 10%, 15%, 5%, 10%, and 15% for PFS/OS, subsequent treatment, treatment-related SAE, dose adjustment, Qol, and compensation, respectively.
conclusionsThe CTONG scoring system, as an objective evaluation model that involves multiple parameters, is a breakthrough method for evaluating the therapeutic value of lung cancer treatment options in China, which is worthy of further verification in future clinical practice.
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.