ArticleJournal of clinical and translational science2025
Characterization of terminated and withdrawn clinical trials for the treatment and prevention of oral mucositis.
Article in Journal of clinical and translational science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Nanomaterials for Theranostic Management of Oral Cancer: Advances in Imaging, Biosensing, Targeted Delivery, and Multimodal Synergistic Therapy.International journal of nanomedicine · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose: Oral mucositis (OM) is a significant complication of cytotoxic cancer therapy and has no effective therapies. Unfortunately, the termination rate of clinical trials (CTs) testing potential OM interventions remains high. Here, we compared the characteristics of failed trials and matched completed trials to identify common features, which might inform better study design. Methods: CTs for the prevention/treatment of OM were identified using Results: Failed OM CTs were more likely to have academic sponsorship (45.7% vs. 39.1%), nonrandomized design (19.6% vs. 4.3%), and lower mean subject accrual (27.8 subjects vs. 101.4 subjects) compared to completed trials. The leading reason for termination was recruitment/enrollment (37.9%). Recruitment/enrollment and safety/efficacy accounted for failure in 84.6% of phase II trials. Conclusion: Contrary to general CTs where safety/efficacy concerns predominate, our results suggest OM-related trial failures are associated with a broader list of challenges including recruitment/enrollment, funding/sponsorship, and investigator/site issues. OM CTs demand aggressive planning, funding, and careful selection of trial sites and sponsorship to assure timely subject recruitment and reduce the risk for early termination and withdrawal.
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.