ArticleThe oncologist2026
Use of real-world evidence in the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicines Agency approvals of oncology products supported by single-arm trials (2022-2025).
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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionRegulatory interest in real-world evidence (RWE) to supplement single-arm trials (SATs) in oncology has increased, yet how the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European Medicines Agency (EMA) evaluate such evidence remains incompletely understood.
objectiveTo comprehensively evaluate recent oncology approvals in which SATs were supported by RWE, characterizing regulatory feedback, methodological approaches, role of RWE in decision-making.
methodsWe reviewed FDA New Drug Applications and Biologics License Applications (NDAs/BLAs), and EMA Marketing Authorizations (MAAs) (January 2022-August 2025). Approvals were identified through publicly available FDA and EMA databases. Regulatory documents were screened using predefined RWE- and SAT-related keywords, with full-text review for data extraction.
resultsAmong 883 original approvals (553 FDA, 330 EMA), 200 were oncology products (134 FDA, 66 EMA). Eighteen applications (7 FDA, 11 EMA) incorporated SATs supplemented by RWE, representing 15 unique products, predominantly for hematologic malignancies (53.3%). All 15 products included at least 1 RWE approach, and 8 used multiple approaches including historical clinical trial data and literature. Among 25 distinct RWE or observational approaches, 16 (64.0%) were retrospective cohort designs drawing on patient-level data from electronic health records (24.0%), disease (20.0%) or product registries (4.0%), or chart abstractions (28.0%). RWE primarily served as contextual/supportive evidence (only 2 use cases viewed as providing "substantial evidence"). Methodological limitations commonly included small sample sizes, population heterogeneity, missing or unmeasured covariates, non-aligned outcome assessments, post-hoc design, and non-contemporaneous treatments.
conclusionsRWE is increasingly used to support oncology SATs and holds promise as supportive or contextual evidence in regulatory decision-making.
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.