OBJECTIVES: Using a targeted literature review, we evaluated the use of real world data to support oncology studies in France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the United Kingdom (the EU5).

METHODS: The PubMed search strategy included terms for real world data (e.g. “real?world data”, “electronic health record*”) related to “oncology” or “cancer*” and the EU5. The results were limited to publication during 2019-2024 and the “Observational Study” article type. The query was conducted in PubMed. The results were screened sequentially by title, abstract, and full text to ensure each article met the selection criteria.

RESULTS: The number of publications meeting the search criteria, by country, were as follows: France (20), Germany (25), Italy (33), Spain (34), and the UK (17). Many (65%) studies included multiple sites, with 16% spanning more than one country. After deduplication, 101 publications remained for the EU5. Specific databases were named in 52 (51%) of the studies. Most named databases appeared only once, but five (ESME, InGef, Network Oncology, RENAPE, TLN) were used across two studies. Prospective observational studies were most common in Germany and France (44% and 30%, respectively) versus retrospective chart review in the UK, Spain, and Italy (47%, 44%, and 39%, respectively). The number of patients/study varied widely: median = 288, interquartile range [108, 860].

CONCLUSIONS: Recently published real world data (RWD) sources for oncology in the EU5 were primarily limited to studies designed for a specific purpose, rather than more general data resources that can support a variety of objectives. There is a need for more standardized oncology RWD sources that can facilitate efficient study execution, such as from electronic health records integrated across multiple sites.