ArticleNeurology2018
Clinical trial design for cutaneous neurofibromas.
Article in Neurology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Unbalancing cAMP and Ras/MAPK pathways as a therapeutic strategy for cutaneous neurofibromas.JCI insight · 2024Article
- Article
- Cutaneous neurofibromas: patients' medical burden, current management and therapeutic expectations: results from an online European patient community survey.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveSeveral clinical trials targeting cutaneous neurofibromas (cNF) have been conducted; however, none has resulted in meaningful changes to care. The Clinical Trial Design and Development subgroup's goals were to (1) define key considerations in the design of clinical trials for cNF, (2) summarize existing data in relation to these considerations, and (3) provide consensus recommendations about key elements of trial design to accelerate the clinical development of therapies for cNF.
methodsThe subgroup, with experts from genetics, dermatology, neurology, oncology, and basic science, spanning academia, government research, and regulatory programs, and industry, reviewed published and unpublished data on clinical trials for cNF and other diseases in the skin. Discussions of these data resulted in formulation of a list of priority issues to address in order to develop efficient and effective clinical trials for cNF.
resultsThe subgroup identified 2 natural history studies of cNF, 4 priority outcome measures, and 6 patient-reported outcome tools for potential use in efficacy trials of cNF. Time to initiate intervention, patient eligibility, mechanism of action, route of administration, safety monitoring, and regulatory agency interactions were identified as key factors to consider when designing clinical trials for cNF.
conclusionsAlignment on endpoints and methods for the measurement and quantification of cNF represent a priority for therapeutic development for cNF. Advances in technological methods and outcome tools utilized in other skin diseases may be applicable to cNF studies. Patient age is an important factor guiding trial design and clinical development path.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.