ArticleJournal of the National Cancer Institute2022
Listening to the Patient Voice Adds Value to Cancer Clinical Trials.
Article in Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 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
20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Systematic review of patient-reported outcome item libraries in cancer research: an EORTC Quality of Life Group study.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2026Pooled it
- Patient-reported outcomes from DESTINY-Breast04: trastuzumab deruxtecan versus physician's choice of chemotherapy in patients with HER2-low mBC.The oncologist · 2025Trial
- Evolving person-focused cancer care: the multifaceted benefits of electronic PRO integration and radiation therapist-led follow-up in radiotherapy.Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- A FeAsibility items Checklist for assessing implementation characTeristics of patient-reported Outcome measures in Research, Regulation and Routine clinical care (FACTOR3): Development and evaluation.Clinical medicine (London, England) · 2026Article
- Optimising patient centred drug development to realise impact.Communications medicine · 2026Article
- Are we reporting well enough? A systematic survey of missing data in patient-reported outcomes from non-small cell lung cancer randomized trials.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2026Article
- Qualitative research to understand the patient experience with advanced and/or metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma.Hepatic oncology · 2025Article
- Engagement Methods in Brain Tumor Genomic Research: Multimethod Comparative Study.Journal of participatory medicine · 2025Article
- Understanding the Role of Patient-Reported Outcomes for Decision-Making in Early-Phase Dose-Finding Clinical Trials.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2025Article
- A Consistent Lack of Consistency: Definitions, Evidentiary Expectations and Potential Use of Meaningful Change Data in Clinical Outcome Assessments Across Stakeholders. Results from a DIA Working Group Literature Review and Survey.Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science · 2025Review
- Article
- Article
- Emerging Ethical Challenges in Manufacturing of Cell-Based Medicines.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2025Review
- Advancing patient-centric care: integrating patient reported outcomes for tolerability assessment in early phase clinical trials - insights from an expert virtual roundtable.EClinicalMedicine · 2024Review
- Community-engaged basic science in an NCI-designated comprehensive cancer center: antioxidants and chemotherapeutic efficacy.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2024Article
- Capturing Patient Voice to Improve Outcomes That Matter to Patients with Desmoid Tumor.Cancer management and research · 2024Review
- Assessment tools for patient-reported outcomes in multiple myeloma.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2023Review
- Article
- Encouraging Rigorous Patient-Generated Data All Along the Drug Development Continuum.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2022Article
- Developing a Discrete Choice Experiment Instrument for Evaluating Patients' Preferences in Precision Oncology.Iranian journal of pharmaceutical research : IJPRArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Comment on
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Randomized clinical trials are critical for evaluating the safety and efficacy of interventions in oncology and informing regulatory decisions, practice guidelines, and health policy. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are increasingly used in randomized trials to reflect the impact of receiving cancer therapies from the patient perspective and can inform evaluations of interventions by providing evidence that cannot be obtained or deduced from clinicians' reports or from other biomedical measures. This commentary focuses on how PROs add value to clinical trials by representing the patient voice. We employed 2 previously published descriptive frameworks (addressing how PROs are used in clinical trials and how PROs have an impact, respectively) and selected 9 clinical trial publications that illustrate the value of PROs according to the framework categories. These include 3 trials where PROs were a primary trial endpoint, 3 trials where PROs as secondary endpoints supported the primary endpoint, and 3 trials where PROs as secondary endpoints contrast the primary endpoint findings in clinically important ways. The 9 examples illustrate that PROs add valuable data to the care and treatment context by informing future patients about how they may feel and function on different treatments and by providing clinicians with evidence to support changes to clinical practice and shared decision making. Beyond the patient and clinician, PROs can enable administrators to consider the cost-effectiveness of implementing new interventions and contribute vital information to policy makers, health technology assessors, and regulators. These examples provide a strong case for the wider implementation of PROs in cancer trials.
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.