ArticleThe oncologist2026
Feasibility of EHR-based prescreening for an adjuvant breast cancer trial in a safety-net health system.
Article in The oncologist, 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionRacial and ethnic inequities persist in oncology clinical trial participation, while safety-net health systems may face resource and data limitations that complicate candidate identification. We evaluated the feasibility of an electronic health record (EHR)-assisted prescreening workflow for EMBER-4, a phase 3 adjuvant breast cancer trial, at a safety-net health system.
methodsStructured Query Language (SQL) queries applied to Epic Clarity identified potential candidates using diagnosis codes, receptor-status codes, endocrine therapy medication records, recent oncology follow-up, and appointment data. Research staff then manually reviewed pathology reports, treatment history, comorbidities, and other protocol criteria to determine full eligibility.
resultsThe source population with a diagnosis of breast cancer included 829 patients: 29% Hispanic, 30% Black, 31% non-Hispanic White, and 9.7% others. Primary language was English in 75% and Spanish in 18%. The SQL query identified 123 potential candidates; manual review confirmed 18 eligible patients comprising 67% Hispanic and 44% Spanish language, yielding a positive predictive value of 15%. Clinicians identified 3 additional eligible patients missed by the query, for 21 known eligible patients overall. Eleven declined participation, one did not attend the scheduled clinic visit, and 9 consented. One patient withdrew before randomization and 8 were enrolled. Six enrolled patients were Hispanic, 1 was non-Hispanic White and 1 was Black.
conclusionsIn a safety-net oncology setting, her-assisted prescreening was feasible but required manual verification and clinician involvement. The workflow identified most known eligible patients, although incomplete structured data and low positive predictive value limited its utility as a standalone screening method.
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.