Does the oncology community have a rejection bias when it comes to repurposed drugs?
Abstract
Among the various measures proposed to combat the challenge of financial toxicity in cancer care, an important strategy is the use of lower-priced drugs instead of expensive alternatives. However, the oncology community seems to either ignore or more readily reject cheaper drugs in cancer care compared to more expensive alternatives. In this commentary, we present three examples of lower-priced drugs rejected or ignored by the oncology community and contrast this with three expensive drugs where persistent optimism remained despite negative clinical trial results. We argue that all drugs be held to the same rigorous standards - this not only includes skepticism in the absence of sound evidence, but also the suspension of premature judgement as has happened in the cases of repurposed drugs.
Read the paper
Related studies
- Metformin as an adjuvant in breast cancer treatment
- Metformin Lysosomal Targeting: A Novel Aspect to Be Investigated for Metformin Repurposing in Neurodegenerative Diseases?
- Aberrant HSF1 signaling activation underlies metformin amelioration of myocardial infarction in mice
- Metformin induces ZFP36 by mTORC1 inhibition in cervical cancer-derived cell lines
- Protein Interaction Network for Identifying Vascular Response of Metformin (Oral Antidiabetic)
- Preventing Long COVID With Metformin
Go deeper in Evidence Hub
Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.