Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36600604›Full record

ArticleJournal for immunotherapy of cancer2022

Patient-reported outcomes in adoptive cell-therapy trials: mind the gap.

Eleonora Ghisoni, Matteo Morotti, Sara Colomer-Lahiguera, Manuela Eicher, George Coukos, Lionel Trueb, Massimo Di Maio

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal for immunotherapy of cancer, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Trial
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

7 authors.

Eleonora GhisoniDepartment of Oncology, Immuno-Oncology Service, University Hospital of Lausanne, CHUV, Lausanne, Vaud, Switzerland.
Matteo MorottiDepartment of Oncology, Immuno-Oncology Service, University Hospital of Lausanne, CHUV, Lausanne, Vaud, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-1790-1185
Sara Colomer-LahigueraDepartment of Oncology, Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Manuela EicherDepartment of Oncology, Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland.
George CoukosDepartment of Oncology, Immuno-Oncology Service, University Hospital of Lausanne, CHUV, Lausanne, Vaud, Switzerland.
Lionel TruebDepartment of Oncology, Immuno-Oncology Service, University Hospital of Lausanne, CHUV, Lausanne, Vaud, Switzerland.
Massimo Di MaioDepartment of Oncology, Azienda Ospedaliera Ordine Mauriziano di Torino, Torino, Piemonte, Italy massimo.dimaio@unito.it.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Adoptive cell therapies (ACT) have demonstrated promise in the treatment of patients with cancer, leading to long-lasting responses and, in some cases, even cure. Technological advances have brought these individualized therapies closer to reality, establishing them as credible therapeutic option. However, to date, few efforts have been made to understand patients' experience during ACT trials. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), which are instruments used to report PROs, are increasingly being used in oncology to capture patients' perspective, provide real-world data on treatment safety, and support decision-making processes, such as health economic decisions. Due to the inherent complexity of ACT, the inclusion of PROMs in this field remains limited. In this commentary, we discuss the benefit of capturing PROs in ACT trials, the challenges of PROM administration and collection, and we propose simple and actionable recommendations to promote their adoption in ACT trials.

Indexed as

NeoplasmsPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresHumansClinical Trials as TopicImmunotherapy, Adoptive

Identifiers

PMID36600604
PMCPMC9743398

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.