ArticleEuropean journal of cancer (Oxford, England : 1990)2025
Performance status eligibility requirements and enrollment characteristics in cancer clinical trials leading to US Food and Drug Administration drugs approval (2009-2023).
Article in European journal of cancer (Oxford, England : 1990), 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.
- Primary results from EL1SSAR, a prospective phase IIIb study of first-line atezolizumab plus nab-paclitaxel therapy for patients with PD-L1-positive advanced triple-negative breast cancer.Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland) · 2026Trial
- Incremental Value of Radiation Dose for Prognostic Stratification Beyond Performance Status in Palliative Radiation Therapy for Bone Metastases.Advances in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- The correlation between pain and function in cancer survivors.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026Article
- Adoptive cell therapies in solid tumors: current clinical landscape, challenges, and future directions.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundParticipants with a low functional status are often excluded from cancer clinical trials, limiting the generalizability of their results. Here we aimed to investigate performance status (PS) eligibility requirements and enrollment characteristics in clinical trials leading to anticancer drug approvals.
methodsWe conducted a cross-sectional study on pivotal clinical trials for non-hematologic solid tumors leading to drug approvals by the US Food and Drug Administration from 2009 to 2023. Participants with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) PS ≥ 2 were defined as having low functional status (i.e., poor PS).
resultsWe identified 283 clinical trials with 158,510 total participants. Four (1.4 %) studies did not use PS as an eligibility criterion. Of the remaining 279 trials, 72 (25.8 %) allowed the enrollment of poor-PS participants, with a negative trend over the 15-year interval (p = 0.01). The proportion of studies enrolling ECOG PS ≥ 2 participants was 43.2 % from 2009-2013, 29.6 % from 2014-2018, and 17.5 % from 2019-2023 (p = 0.002). Notably, early-phase studies included poor-PS participants more frequently than phase 3 clinical trials (40.8 % vs 20.2 %; p = 0.01). Finally, over the 15-year interval, the median (interquartile range) proportions of ECOG PS 0, 1, and 2 participants were 53.7 % (38.7 %-65.7 %), 45.1 % (33.5 %-58.8 %), and 4.3 % (1.8 %-7.9 %), respectively.
conclusionsA limited fraction of pivotal clinical trials included participants with poor PS, with a median percentage enrollment of less than 5 %. Sponsors, institutional review boards, and investigators must collaborate to broaden PS eligibility criteria to achieve more representative trial populations.
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.