ReviewJCO clinical cancer informatics2023
Measuring What Is Meaningful in Cancer Cachexia Clinical Trials: A Path Forward With Digital Measures of Real-World Physical Behavior.
Review in JCO clinical cancer informatics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- Cancer cachexia: A tumor-driven disorder of whole-body homeostasis.Cancer cell · 2026Review
- Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe burden of cancer cachexia on patients' health-related quality of life, specifically their physical functioning, is well documented, but clinical trials thus far have failed to show meaningful improvement in physical functioning. The purpose of this review is to summarize existing methods of assessing physical function in cancer cachexia, outline a path forward for measuring what is meaningful to patients using digital measures derived from digital health technologies (DHTs), and discuss the current landscape of digital measures from the clinical and regulatory standpoint.
designFor this narrative review, peer-reviewed articles were searched on PubMed, clinical trials records were searched on clinicaltrials.gov, and records of digital measures submitted for regulatory qualification were searched on the US Food and Drug Administration's Drug Development Tool Qualification Program database.
resultsThere are gaps in assessing aspects of physical function that matter to patients. Existing assessment methods such as patient-reported outcomes and objective performance outcomes have limitations, including their episodic nature and burden to patients. DHTs such as wearable sensors can capture real-world physical behavior continuously, passively, and remotely, and may provide a more comprehensive picture of patients' everyday functioning. Recent regulatory submissions showcase potential clinical implementation of digital measures in various therapeutic areas.
conclusionDigital measures of real-world physical behavior present an opportunity to detect and demonstrate improvements in physical functioning in cancer cachexia, but evidence-based development is critical. For their use in clinical and regulatory decision making, studies demonstrating meaningfulness to patients as well as feasibility and validation are necessary.
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.