ArticleCancer research and treatment2025
Significant Dissatisfaction with an Outdated System: A Survey on the Experience of Application for Off-Label Use of Anti-cancer Drugs by the Korean Society of Medical Oncology.
Article in Cancer research and treatment, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThis study evaluates the experiences and satisfaction levels of Korean medical oncologists with the prior authorization system for the off-label use of anti-cancer drugs. Conducted by the Korean Society of Medical Oncology (KSMO), the survey aimed to identify challenges and areas for improvement in the current regulatory framework. MATERIALS AND
methodsA cross-sectional web-based survey was carried out between May 4 and May 14, 2023, targeting 261 active KSMO medical oncologists. Invitations were sent via email, and the survey, comprising 19 questions, was hosted on Microsoft Forms. The questions covered personal characteristics, work environment, experiences with the pre-application process, and post-approval experiences.
resultsFor the 261 invitations sent, 110 responses (42.1%) were received. Most respondents had over 10 years of experience and worked in tertiary hospitals. Although 93.6% were familiar with the pre-application system, 67.3% expressed moderate to high dissatisfaction. The key issues included complex applications, long approval period, stringent criteria, and inconsistent reviews. Additionally, 74.4% of respondents spent over 3 hours on first-time applications, with 68.3% experiencing rejections. Emotional responses to rejections were largely negative, with many feeling disregarded. Post-approval, patients of 96.8% of respondents faced financial burdens leading to treatment discontinuation. Most oncologists (86.0%) supported selective reimbursement if the disease was controlled for a certain period.
conclusionThe survey highlights significant dissatisfaction with the current system, suggesting the need for streamlining the application process, easing approval criteria, and reconsidering the financial aspects of post-approval treatments to support patient care and oncologists' decision-making autonomy.
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.