ArticleNature communications2024
Outcome differences by sex in oncology clinical trials.
Article in Nature communications, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
42 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 45 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sex-based prognosis in industry-sponsored advanced solid tumor trials: an individual participant data meta-analysis of survival and adverse events.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2026Pooled it
- Global clinical trials on stem cell therapy for autoimmune diseases: trends and future directions.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Pooled it
- Twenty-year survival outcomes after multipeptide vaccination for resected high-risk melanoma: A post-hoc analysis of a randomized clinical trial.International journal of cancer · 2025Trial
- BEAM versus EAM, FEAM, BeEAM, and TEAM: exploring conditioning strategies in autologous stem cell transplantation for Hodgkin lymphoma a retrospective study of the LWP of EBMT.Bone marrow transplantation · 2026Article
- Sex-Biased Immunity: The Hidden Variable in Immuno-oncology.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2026Review
- Trials for Rare Cancers Are More Successful than those for Common Cancers.ESMO rare cancers · 2026Article
- Claims of sex-dependent effects in the behavioral and brain sciences are infrequently supported by valid statistical comparisons.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
- Gender differences in cancer care experiences in Switzerland: a multicentre cross-sectional study.BMJ open · 2026Article
- Sex-based differences in tolerability of developmental antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).ESMO open · 2026Article
- Article
- Why counting women is not enough: from inclusion to equity in oncology trials.Nature reviews. Urology · 2026Article
- Primary Tumor-Associated Loss of the Y Chromosome and Clinical Outcome in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.Genes, chromosomes & cancer · 2026Article
- Review
- A retrospective pharmacovigilance analysis based on the FAERS database reveals sex-associated differences in toxicities of CAR T-cell therapy.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Incorporation of the National Institute of Health (NIH) sex as a biological variable policy by R01 grant awardees.Communications medicine · 2026Article
- Sex as a biological variable in nonclinical studies: Bridging scientific rigor, animal welfare, and regulatory expectations.Animal models and experimental medicine · 2026Review
- Success rates of American clinical oncology trials by geographic factors.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Radiotherapy in addition to systemic therapy reduces the early mortality of angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma.Annals of hematology · 2026Article
- Beyond XX and XY, Understanding Sex Differences in Leukemia.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Sex Impacts Progression-Free Survival of Alectinib through Drug Exposure in Patients withCancer communications (London, England) · 2026Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Identifying sex differences in outcomes and toxicity between males and females in oncology clinical trials is important and has also been mandated by National Institutes of Health policies. Here we analyze the Trialtrove database, finding that, strikingly, only 472/89,221 oncology clinical trials (0.5%) had curated post-treatment sex comparisons. Among 288 trials with comparisons of survival, outcome, or response, 16% report males having statistically significant better survival outcome or response, while 42% reported significantly better survival outcome or response for females. The strongest differences are in trials of EGFR inhibitors in lung cancer and rituximab in non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (both favoring females). Among 44 trials with side effect comparisons, more trials report significantly lesser side effects in males (N = 22) than in females (N = 13). Thus, while statistical comparisons between sexes in oncology trials are rarely reported, important differences in outcome and toxicity exist. These considerable outcome and toxicity differences highlight the need for reporting sex differences more thoroughly going forward.
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.