ArticleClinical medicine (London, England)2023
Patients with cancer and sepsis trials: an unfair representation?
Article in Clinical medicine (London, England), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Representation and reporting of patients with cancer in mortality-focused adult ICU randomized trials: a systematic review.BMC anesthesiology · 2026Pooled it
- Cancer Patients with Sepsis: Prognostic Insights from a Population-Based Cohort Study in Norway.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2026Article
- Investigation of pathogen resistance in Chinese cancer patients based on bacterial resistance surveillance in 23 provinces, 2016-2023.Frontiers in microbiology · 2026Article
- Microbial infection and treatment strategies in cancer patients.Frontiers in microbiology · 2025Review
- Flow cytometry-based evaluation of CD4/CD25 and IL-17 expression in sepsis of cancer surgical patients.International journal of immunopathology and pharmacologyArticle
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Approximately 20% of sepsis cases are thought to occur in patients with cancer. Thus, such patients are an important cohort to be represented and characterised among sepsis trials. However, patients with cancer are commonly excluded from sepsis trials, although the extent to which is unknown. In this opinion article, we discuss our findings that suggest that patients with cancer are being under-represented in sepsis trials, often with an unclear rationale. We question the validity of generalising results from sepsis trials to heterogenous cancer populations and call for wider inclusion of patients with cancer to bridge this knowledge gap in sepsis management.
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.