ArticleCancers2025
"Are You Just Looking to 'Survive'?": A Qualitative Study of Importance of Oncology Endpoints Beyond Overall Survival in Early-Stage Cancer.
Article in Cancers, 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.
- Evaluating Patient Preferences for Clinical Trial Endpoints in Early-Stage Cancer: A Discrete Choice Experiment in Canada.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesIn early-stage oncology clinical trials, the use of endpoints beyond overall survival (OS), including recurrence-free survival (RFS) or event-free survival (EFS), is becoming more common. To understand whether these outcomes are important to patients, this study explored the perceived value of non-OS endpoints among Canadians treated for early-stage cancer or with curative intent.
methodsCanadians treated for early-stage breast, lung, or gastrointestinal cancer participated in semi-structured interviews. Participants provided perspectives on OS, RFS, disease-free survival (DFS), EFS, and pathological complete response (pCR) endpoints. Reflexive thematic analysis was used to explore patterns in responses and alignment of trial endpoints with patient treatment goals, priorities and preferences.
resultsThe mean age of the 33 participants was 54.8 years, and 21 were female; 28 reported prior surgery, and 21 were also treated with chemotherapy (11 specified as neo-adjuvant; 9 specified adjuvant). All participants valued OS, and most viewed non-OS endpoints as reflective of their treatment priorities, including maintaining health-related quality of life and getting back to 'normal'. They also valued timely and equitable treatment access and equated having access to new treatments with better options. While participants considered efficacy data from clinical trials provided by non-OS endpoints sufficient to want access to new treatments, the relative importance of being disease- or recurrence-free versus maximizing length of life differed according to recurrence status, prognosis, cancer type and life stage.
conclusionsThese findings support the relevance and importance of non-OS endpoints to Canadians with early-stage cancer and highlight participants' desire for rapid approval of treatments with demonstrated improvements in non-OS endpoints.
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.