ArticleBMJ oncology2024
As bleak as it sounds? Analysing trends in oncology clinical trial initiation in the UK from 2010 to 2022.
Article in BMJ oncology, 2024. 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.
- Oncology drug development in the UK: analysis of the past 25 years and focus on the 2026 reboot of the clinical trial regulatory framework.British journal of cancer · 2026Article
- A mixed-methods evaluation of the quantitative and perceived impact of Brexit on UK oncology clinical trial initiation between 2011 and 2020.Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice · 2026Article
- Current landscape of innovative drug development and regulatory support in China.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2025Review
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
Abstract
Objectives: The UK's withdrawal from the European Union (a political movement known as 'Brexit') incited concern both in the public and private sector about the future of drug development and the clinical trial landscape in the UK. This study evaluates trends in the initiation of phase III clinical trials that evaluated systemic anticancer treatments from 2010 to 2022 both in the UK and worldwide. Methods and analysis: Relevant clinical trials were identified through ClinicalTrials.gov. Initiation date in each country was defined as the date that a study's record was updated to include a recruiting site in the country of interest. Concurrent clinical site counts were defined as the number of facilities that contemporaneously hosted trials. Temporal trends in trial initiation and site counts were evaluated. Results: Our analysis uncovered a worldwide increase in clinical trial initiation from 2013 to 2019. The UK experienced a decrease in clinical trial initiation immediately post-Brexit in 2020 but rebounded in 2021. The UK's resurgence in clinical trials in 2021 was driven predominately by industry-funded trials. Other countries saw a similar increase in clinical trial initiation from 2020 to 2021. Conclusions: The UK's trends in phase III oncology clinical trial initiation from 2010 to 2022 largely reflects global trends, suggesting that other factors (eg, COVID-19 pandemic) beyond Brexit, may have had a stronger influence on clinical trial initiation within the UK.
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.