ArticleJAC-antimicrobial resistance2025
Facing antimicrobial resistance in cancer care: what the AIOM survey tells us about oncologists' awareness.
Article in JAC-antimicrobial resistance, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Infections with antimicrobial-resistant (AMR) organisms significantly worsen outcomes in cancer patients. Since the main cause of AMR is the inappropriate use of antibiotics for prophylactic or empirical treatment, antimicrobial stewardship programmes (ASPs) have been developed. Few papers on ASPs describe prospective audits in oncology settings. In light of this, the Italian Association of Medical Oncology (AIOM) has decided to evaluate the oncologists' perceptions of this issue with a brief survey. Methods: An anonymous 14-item questionnaire was shared online during the XXVI National Congress on the AIOM website. The survey was divided into two sections. The first set of questions collected the hospital organization and practices (Q1-Q6), while the second one was about the clinical practices and antibiotic therapy (Q7-Q14). Results: Sixty-four medical oncologists completed the anonymous questionnaire. Seventy-two percent of respondents believe that AMR is a significant issue in cancer patients, and an equal percentage considers it likely that a cancer patient will become infected with a MDR pathogen. Despite these concerns, only 48% ( Conclusions: This survey highlights the urgent need for educating and training oncologists on AMR, as well as the importance of the development of oncology-specific guidelines to mitigate the impact of AMR in this high-risk population.
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.