ArticleJournal of the National Cancer Institute2025
Enrollment in Children's Oncology Group's clinical trials: population-based linkage with the National Childhood Cancer Registry.
Article in Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Blinatumomab Care Delivery for Pediatric B-Cell Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Childhood Cancer Data Initiative Participant Index: Mapping Pediatric Cancer Data to Facilitate Cross-Study Integrated Analysis.JCO clinical cancer informatics · 2026Article
- Health Insurance as a Mediator of Neighborhood Deprivation and Pediatric Cancer Survival: An Analysis of State Cancer Registry Data.Cancer medicine · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
25 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundImprovements in outcomes among children and adolescents diagnosed with cancer are attributable to many factors, including clinical trials such as those administered through the Children's Oncology Group (COG) as well as population-based resources such as the National Childhood Cancer Registry (NCCR). The objective of this study was to link COG trial data with the NCCR to evaluate overall enrollment patterns.
methodsData were received from the NCCR and COG that were linked using an array of variables, then compared to evaluate enrollment patterns in COG studies from 2007 to 2018. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify characteristics associated with not being enrolled in a COG study.
resultsAmong 134 696 NCCR patients with cancer, 51 062 matched with COG study enrollees. There were several differences in demographic and clinical characteristics between individuals enrolled and not enrolled in COG studies. Enrollment was higher among children aged from birth to 4 years compared with adolescents aged 15-19 years (53.7% vs 20.1%). Differences by race and ethnicity were also observed; for example, individuals who identified as non-Hispanic White were more likely to be enrolled than were individuals who identified as non-Hispanic Asian or Pacific Islander (38.8% vs 32.9%). In a multivariable logistic regression model, several characteristics were strongly associated with not being enrolled in a COG study, including age at diagnosis, year of diagnosis, race and ethnicity, and cancer type.
conclusionOur results suggest that several groups are underrepresented in COG clinical trials. This information can help guide the prioritization of population groups for engagement in future studies.
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.