Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42057418›Full record

ArticleStatistical methods in medical research2026

PRO-ADD: Patient-empowered dose-finding trials integrating safety, preliminary efficacy and patient-reported outcomes for optimal dose selection.

Emily Alger, Sumithra J Mandrekar, Jun Yin, Christina Yap

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Statistical methods in medical research, 2026. 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.

Emily AlgerClinical Trial and Statistics Unit, Institute of Cancer Research, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-5378-7439
Sumithra J MandrekarDepartment of Quantitative Health Sciences, Mayo Clinic, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-7658-1134
Jun YinDepartment of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Moffitt Cancer Center, USA.
Christina YapClinical Trial and Statistics Unit, Institute of Cancer Research, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6715-2514

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Advances in oncology drug development are driving the emergence of novel therapies, challenging traditional dose-efficacy assumptions in dose-finding oncology trials. Traditional trial designs aim to identify a maximum tolerated dose (MTD) by assessing patients' dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) - adopting traditional dose-efficacy paradigms that efficacy increases with treatment dose. With these new therapies in mind, emphasis should shift toward methodological advancements in trial designs aimed at identifying optimal doses, rather than solely determining MTDs. Incorporating patient-reported outcomes (PROs) within dose-finding oncology trials is increasingly recommended to better understand treatments' tolerability profiles, especially given the extended tolerability assessment windows for novel immunotherapies and targeted therapies. This article introduces PRO-ADD (

Indexed as

Antineoplastic AgentsClinical Trials as TopicDose-Response Relationship, DrugMaximum Tolerated DosePatient Reported Outcome MeasuresHumansNeoplasmsResearch DesignTreatment OutcomeAntineoplastic Agentsdose-finding trialsdose-optimisationoptimal biological dosePatient-reported outcomesphase I

Identifiers

PMID42057418
PMCPMC13283501

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.