ArticleBritish journal of cancer2023
Evidence into practice: a national cohort study of NICE-recommended oncological drug therapy utilisation among women diagnosed with invasive breast cancer in England.
Article in British journal of cancer, 2023. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- QL1209 (pertuzumab biosimilar) versus reference pertuzumab plus trastuzumab and docetaxel in neoadjuvant treatment for HER2-positive, ER/PR-negative, early or locally advanced breast cancer: A multicenter, randomized, double-blinded, parallel-controlled, phase III equivalence trial.British journal of cancer · 2024Trial
- Treatment and survival ofESMO real world data and digital oncology · 2026Article
- Breast cancer care for the aging population: a focus on age-related disparities in breast cancer treatment.BMC cancer · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMultiple drug treatments are approved for invasive breast cancer (IBC). We investigated uptake of NICE-recommended oncological drugs and variation by age, comorbidity burden and geographical region.
methodsWomen (aged 50+ years) diagnosed with IBC from 2014 to 2019, were identified from England Cancer Registry data and drug utilisation from Systemic Anti-Cancer Therapy data. Interrupted time series analysis assessed national-level changes in drug use after publication of NICE recommendations. Regression models analysed variation in use.
resultsThis national cohort included 168,449 women. Use of drugs recommended for first-line treatment varied, from 26.6% for CDK 4/6 inhibitors to 63.8% for HER2-targeting therapies. Utilisation of drugs with a NICE recommendation published between 2014 and 2019, increased among patients diagnosed around the time of publication, except in the case of pertuzumab for metastatic breast cancer (MBC) which was previously accessible via the Cancer Drugs Fund (though use of pertuzumab for MBC increased from 34.1% to 75.0% across the study period). Use of trastuzumab and neoadjuvant/adjuvant pertuzumab varied by geographical region. Use was low for ribociclib (2.2%), abemaciclib (2.3%) and for drugs recommended beyond the first-line setting. For all drugs, use after NICE recommendation varied by age at diagnosis and increased as stage increased.
conclusionsUse of NICE-recommended drugs for IBC in routine care is variable, with lowest use among women aged 70+ years. Improving access to effective treatments is an important step in improving outcomes.
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.