Loading
Life sciences · Journal article
Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications · September 29, 2026
No summary has been generated for this record yet. What follows is drawn from its source metadata only.
Journal article.
No findings were extractable from the material analysed.
Safety was not reported in the material analysed. Check the source before drawing any conclusion about harm.
The source did not state who this applies to in practice.
Graded across the dimensions that decide whether you should act, each from what the source actually supports. There is no single score, and where a dimension was not assessed it says so.
This record has not been graded across any dimension yet. Treat the label above as provisional and read the source.
What is missing. This record has no bottom line, key findings, reported figures, evidence dimensions. That is a gap in the analysis, not a judgement about the study.
Primary health care (PHC) offers a strategic opportunity to conduct research with immunotherapeutic products for cancer treatment. To evaluate the implementation of a program for conducting oncological clinical trials in PHC settings. The implementation objectives focused on assessing structure, process, and outcome indicators against predefined standards; the intervention objectives compared process and clinical outcomes (overall survival, quality of life, and patient satisfaction) in PHC settings against a historical control from secondary care. A longitudinal, prospective, analytical implementation study was conducted in Cuba between January 2016 and August 2023. An open-label, uncontrolled, non-randomized, multicenter, phase IV clinical trial using the CIMAvax-EGF vaccine for patients with advanced lung cancer was used as a case study. The implementation was conducted in three phases: pilot study, replication, and generalization. This paper presents the outcomes of the generalization phase. For evaluation, structure, process, and outcome indicators were assessed against predefined standards and compared with a historical control from secondary health care (SHC). An indicator was considered adequate if it met the standard. The overall dimension (structure, process, or outcome) was considered acceptable if ≥ 70% of its indicators were adequate. The program was implemented in 119 polyclinics nationwide. For structure, 83% (5/6) of indicators were adequate; for process, 83% (5/6) were adequate; for outcome, 100% (4/4) were adequate. All three dimensions met the predefined standards. Process and outcome indicators were comparable or superior to the SHC historical control. Structure and outcome indicators improved after implementation. The results support the feasibility and effectiveness of implementing oncological clinical trials in Cuban PHC centers, demonstrating a positive impact on the target population.