ArticleAdvances in therapy2026
Clinically Meaningful, Patient-Centered Endpoints for Real-World Evidence Generation in Breast Cancer: Perspectives from the Multidisciplinary TRIUMPH Initiative.
Article in Advances in therapy, 2026. 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Stakeholders have made major advances in generation of real-world evidence (RWE); however, core challenges remain, limiting its value and utility in guiding treatment decision-making. In particular, persisting lack of industry consensus on standardized, clinically meaningful, patient-centered endpoints was considered a critical area of interest for the multidisciplinary Think tank on RWE In the US from Multiple Perspectives in Healthcare (TRIUMPH). Collaborating in a group forum, TRIUMPH assembled and reviewed a first draft of potential endpoints that may be more consistently incorporated into RWE research. Among this list, time to next treatment, adherence/persistence, psychosocial well-being, and frailty were prioritized for subsequent discussion on ways to enable their broader adoption. Across the four endpoints, key opportunities for improving adoption included additional education for researchers, standardization of algorithms, and exploration of new approaches for derivation in real-world data. Over the course of discussion, TRIUMPH also identified frailty and area/neighborhood socioeconomic status as key baseline characteristics that may guide stratified analyses of the prioritized endpoints, to increase patient-centric value of the resulting RWE. In the future, other endpoints and characteristics (beyond those in focus for TRIUMPH) will also likely emerge, and should similarly be incorporated into routine care and research, to continue growing the utility of RWE in better informing treatment decision-making.
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.