ReviewCurrent reviews in clinical and experimental pharmacology2023
Review of Clinical Equipoise: Examples from Oncology Trials.
Review in Current reviews in clinical and experimental pharmacology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- An updated, comprehensive meta-analysis of the treatment of anti-NMDAR encephalitis: Analysis, equipoise, and the urgent need for evidence over anecdote.Journal of neuroimmunology · 2025Pooled it
- Proportion of patients in phase 2 oncology trials receiving treatments that are ultimately approved.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2025Article
- Challenges, Complexities, and Considerations in the Design and Interpretation of Late-Phase Oncology Trials.Seminars in radiation oncology · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe current standards that govern clinical research have been shaped over the years through many historical, social, and political events. The third principle of the Belmont Report, Justice, guides the scientific community toward the equal distribution of benefits and risks in research involving human subjects. Clinical equipoise is the status of genuine uncertainty by the investigator about the superiority of one treatment arm over the other. The term clinical equipoise was proposed to provide an ethical ground to conduct randomized controlled clinical trials.
objectiveThe objective of this review is to provide the reader with an overview of the emergence of the term equipoise and its utilization in randomized controlled trials.
methodsIn the current review article, the major oncology clinical trials and relevant patents were reviewed for the application/utilization of clinical equipoise.
resultsThe concept of clinical equipoise has been challenged, and different alternatives were proposed. Yet, these alternatives received numerous critiques and failed to fully replace equipoise. In addition, several patents related to anticancer agents tested in the described studies were examined. No specific reference was made as part of the patent to the status of clinical equipoise. Alternatively, a description of the study arms was provided.
conclusionThere is a need for revisiting the concept of equipoise and its suggested alternatives for its ethical essence while addressing related challenges.
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.