ReviewFrontiers in oncology2025
Mapping the clinical trial landscape of multiple primary lung cancer in the era of precision oncology: persistent exclusion and design limitations hamper evidence-based treatment development.
Review in Frontiers in oncology, 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.
- Utilizing clinical features, genetic mutations, and a 14-gene molecular assay for optimizing the management of multiple primary lung cancer.Translational lung cancer research · 2026Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Multiple primary lung cancer (MPLC) is increasingly recognized for its clinical and biological significance, yet it remains strikingly underrepresented in clinical trials. We systematically analyzed 8,212 lung cancer trials registered between 2015 and 2024 across four major international registries, finding that only 18 (0.22%) explicitly included MPLC patients. Most of these trials were early-phase, observational, and surgery-focused, with minimal incorporation of biomarker-driven or precision strategies. This underrepresentation reflects a structural exclusion rooted in traditional single-lesion trial paradigms. It is further exacerbated by limited engagement from industry and government sponsors due to high trial complexity and low commercial incentive. Inclusion-oriented frameworks are urgently needed to align research with MPLC's clinical reality.
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.