Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35195787›Full record

ReviewMedical oncology (Northwood, London, England)2022

Innovation in cancer therapeutics and regulatory perspectives.

Pinky Sharma, Vikas Jhawat, Pooja Mathur, Rohit Dutt

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Medical oncology (Northwood, London, England), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing 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

28 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Design, synthesis, andRSC advances · 2025
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

4 authors.

Pinky SharmaSchool of Medical and Allied Sciences, GD Goenka University, Gurugram, Haryana, India.
Vikas JhawatSchool of Medical and Allied Sciences, GD Goenka University, Gurugram, Haryana, India. jhawat231287@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5106-9636
Pooja MathurSchool of Medical and Allied Sciences, GD Goenka University, Gurugram, Haryana, India.
Rohit DuttSchool of Medical and Allied Sciences, GD Goenka University, Gurugram, Haryana, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cancer therapy has undergone a drastic revolution in the past few decades with the introduction of several novel therapies, like immunotherapy (active and passive), stem cell-based therapies, and nanocarrier-based therapies. These therapies have addressed the issues of conventional cancer therapy (chemotherapy or radiotherapy), like specificity and off-target effects. Further, the introduction of such treatments has improved survival and converted a terminal disease into a more manageable condition. However, many clinical, ethical, and regulatory issues are raised with such novel additions. Several effective therapies are under research but could not come to market or are delayed due to regulatory concerns for marketing approval. The scope of this review encompasses the examination of these regulatory issues and discuss their possible solutions. A practical and flexible regulatory approach, harmonized globally, could help the patients suffering from a terminal illness to lead a quality life.

Indexed as

Drug ApprovalAntineoplastic AgentsCost of IllnessHumansImmunotherapyNanotechnologyNeoplasmsStem Cell TransplantationAntineoplastic AgentsCancer therapyImmunotherapyNovel therapyRegulatory challenges

Identifiers

PMID35195787
PMCPMC8863908

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.