ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2025
Stratification system for pharmaceutical care in cancer patients: Chinese expert consensus.
Article in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2025. 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.
- Impact of Switching from Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate to Tenofovir Alafenamide or Entecavir in Older Patients with Chronic Hepatitis B.Infectious diseases and therapy · 2026Article
- Carbohydrate-Functionalized Liposomal Nanocarriers: Design Strategies for Receptor-Mediated Organ Targeting and Advanced Theranostic Applications.AAPS PharmSciTech · 2026Review
- Mitochondrial-Based Nanomedicine in Treatment of Liver Cancer.Molecular biotechnology · 2026Review
- Mechanistic insights into piperlongumine's neuroprotective role against cisplatin-induced neuropathy: a network pharmacology, molecular dynamics, and experimental approach.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: China bears one of the world's heaviest cancer burdens, with a complex and multimodal cancer treatment environment. Currently, the absence of a standardized framework for oncology pharmaceutical care limits the quality and precision of services, highlighting an urgent need for clinical guidance. Objective: The objective of this study was to establish an evidence- and practice-informed consensus on oncology pharmaceutical care, providing a standardized framework for clinical practice. Methods: Under the leadership of Sichuan Cancer Hospital and in collaboration with national academic organizations, a multidisciplinary expert panel conducted a systematic literature review, nationwide surveys, and consensus meetings. The recommendations were formalized through a two-round Delphi process. Results: Three levels of pharmaceutical care are defined in this consensus, along with their corresponding implementation principles, including prioritization of high-risk patients, assignment of the highest applicable level when multiple criteria are met, and dynamic reassessment in response to changes in clinical status. The stratification system is established based on a comprehensive assessment across three core dimensions: 1) Pathophysiological conditions, including fertility preservation, age, body mass index, performance status, comorbid chronic diseases, concurrent infections, nutritional status and support, pain management, and hepatic or renal impairment; 2) Medication-related factors, encompassing antineoplastic agent toxicity risk and management, therapeutic drug monitoring, pharmacogenomics, clinically significant drug-drug interactions, polypharmacy, special administration routes or delivery devices, medication adherence, and complex medication issues; 3) Non-medication therapeutic interventions, such as radiotherapy, interventional therapy, surgery, and novel therapies (e.g., CAR-T therapy, tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte therapy). Specific recommendations for stratified pharmaceutical care were formulated based on these factors. Conclusions: This expert consensus establishes a standardized and practical framework for stratified pharmaceutical care in cancer patients, aiming to improve care quality, optimize resource allocation, and enhance patient outcomes in China. It may also serve as a reference model for international initiatives seeking to establish or refine standards for oncology pharmaceutical care.
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.