ArticleJCO oncology advances2025
Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic Mitigation Strategies on Cancer Treatment Trials: A Meta-Analysis of Industry and National Cancer Institute Studies.
Article in JCO oncology advances, 2025. 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 Multiregional Decentralized Clinical Trial Program to Improve Access.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Bridging the rural cancer gap: why clinical trials must include rural patients.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in early 2020 disrupted the conduct of cancer clinical trials. In response, federal agencies allowed more flexibility for trial recruitment and patient follow-up. A key question is whether the benefits of adopting these strategies outweigh the potential detriments to quality metrics.
methodsA joint ASCO and Friends of Cancer Research task force invited industry and National Cancer Institute trial sponsors to contribute deidentified trial-level aggregate data on enrollment, major protocol deviations, dropouts, and severe adverse events (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events grade 3-5). These quality metrics were examined as proportions of participants at risk during the pre-COVID-19 (January 2017-February, 2020), initial wave (March-April, 2020), initial recovery (May-December, 2020), and secondary recovery (January 2021-December 2022) periods. Multilevel beta-regression was used, adjusting for phase; study and sponsor were treated as random effects. Indicator variables were used with pre-COVID-19 as the reference.
resultsTen sponsors contributed 67 analyzable trials with N = 12,000 US-based participants. Enrollment odds decreased 49% in the initial wave (odds ratio [OR], 0.51 [95% CI, 0.30 to 0.86],
conclusionIn this multicollaborator evaluation, large declines in enrollment, major protocol deviations, dropouts, and severe toxicity during the acute phase of the pandemic all returned to pre-COVID-19 levels by 2021-2022. These findings highlight the impact of the temporary disruption to trial conduct during the pandemic's peak, but suggest that pandemic-related procedural flexibility did not result in long-term reduced data quality. Sponsors and regulators should consider broader adaptation of trial flexibilities moving forward.
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.