ArticleCancers2025
Assessment of Objective Response Rate by Investigator vs. Blinded Independent Central Review in Pivotal Trials of Oncology Drugs for Solid Tumor Indications.
Article in Cancers, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Concordance in assessments between investigators and blinded independent central review (BICR) in hematology oncology clinical trials: a meta-analysis.The oncologist · 2025Pooled it
- Main factors associated with variability in the assessment of the objective response rate. A re-analysis of the PHEREXA phase 3 clinical trial.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2026Trial
- Correlation analysis of serum amyloid A, neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio, platelet-lymphocyte ratio, and systemic immune-inflammation index with neoadjuvant therapy efficacy and prognosis in breast cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Looking ahead in early-phase trial design to improve the drug development process: examples in oncology.BMC medical research methodology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.
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.