ArticleClinical pharmacology and therapeutics2026
Epidemiological Characteristics, Target Distribution, and Clinical Value of Targeted Anticancer Drugs Approved in China: A Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics, 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
China has advanced both domestic innovation and the introduction of imported targeted anticancer drugs (TADs). However, characteristics of these TADs remain unclear. In this cross-sectional study, we identified TADs approved in China from 2017 to 2024. Trend in number, target distributions, endpoint evidence, clinical benefit (via European Society for Medical Oncology-Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale [ESMO-MCBS]), and the price were analyzed. Of the approved 143 TADs (315 indications), 64 (44.8%) (145 indications [46.0%]) were domestically developed and 79 (55.2%) (170 indications [54.0%]) were imported, with annual growth rates of 31.0% for domestic TADs (incidence rate ratio 1.310, 95% CI; 1.158-1.482; P < 0.001) vs. 9.8% for imported TADs (1.098, 95% CI; 0.992-1.215; P = 0.071). A total of 52 drug targets were identified (23 domestic; 47 imported). Imported TAD indications more often reported overall survival (OS) than domestic drugs (44.1% vs. 29.0%; P = 0.006), but domestic TAD indications showed better OS (hazard ratio 0.69, 95% CI 0.66-0.71 vs. 0.73, 95% CI 0.71-0.76). Domestic TAD indications were predominantly rated as having intermediate clinical benefit (57.9% vs. 35.9% for imported), while high benefit was less frequent (22.1% vs. 35.3%) and low benefit slightly less common (20.0% vs. 28.8%). Median monthly treatment prices were consistently higher for imported than domestic TADs across all drug categories. In conclusion, both domestic and imported TADs continued to increase. Domestic TAD targets were highly concentrated. Fewer than half of domestic and imported TAD indications reported OS, and less than 40% in either group achieved high-grade clinical benefit. Imported TADs had higher monthly treatment prices than domestic TADs.
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.