Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41357505›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in medicine2025

A comparison of the labeling of antineoplastic and supportive medicines in China, Japan, and the US based on the WHO essential medicines list.

Chenyu Du, Jiaxin Liu, Caiyi Wang, Pengcheng Liu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Chenyu DuSchool of International Pharmaceutical Business, China Pharmaceutical University, Nanjing, China.
Jiaxin LiuSchool of International Pharmaceutical Business, China Pharmaceutical University, Nanjing, China.
Caiyi WangSchool of International Pharmaceutical Business, China Pharmaceutical University, Nanjing, China.
Pengcheng LiuSchool of International Pharmaceutical Business, China Pharmaceutical University, Nanjing, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: This study systematically compares the safety information presented on drug labels for antineoplastic and supportive care medications listed on the WHO Essential Medicines List (EML) across three major pharmaceutical markets: China, Japan, and the United States. Methods: The safety information of the same drugs approved in the three countries was compared and analyzed, involving the calculation of the proportion of each safety information and the percentage of boxed warnings (PBW) to all information on the label, we also comparative analysis of pediatric medication information studied from each country. Results: There were substantial differences in each safety information of the labels in three countries. Except for the proportion of information on use in the elderly, the proportion of each type of safety information differed significantly between countries, and the content also varied widely. Concordance of the presence or the absence of a BW on the label between China, Japan, and the US was 36% on the total labels. Of the 19 drugs, Japan had the most pediatric drug information with 13 drugs, followed by the US with nine drugs and China with eight drugs. Conclusion: There were significant differences in the safety information on drug labels in China, Japan, and the US from the same manufacturer, which could pose a risk to patients. Regulatory agencies should better align their approaches to labeling to prevent confusion or misunderstanding across regions.

Indexed as

antineoplastic and supportive medicinesdrug labelsFDANMPAPMDA

Identifiers

PMID41357505
PMCPMC12675360

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.