Objective: To evaluate the influence of research abstracts in guiding evidence based decisions of the Ontario Cancer Drug Approval Committee. Methods: The Ontario Cancer Drug Approval Committee is a joint initiative between the Ontario Ministry of Health and Cancer Care Ontario that provides a clinical and economic evaluation process for new cancer-related drugs for formulary listing consideration. The minutes of the monthly committee meetings between 2005 and 2007 were reviewed. One submission per drug indication was included. Elements from the decisions were entered into a database which included the level of evidence supporting each decision, the location from which the evidence originated, and the year the literature was produced. An abstract was defined as anything in the evidentiary base that was unpublished or was clearly defined as an abstract in the meeting mintues. Results: There were 62 recommendations reviewed over the 27 months. Ten recommendations were deferred and 8 recommendations were re-submissions, thus 44 recommendations underwent analysis. The subcommittee decisions were based on literature of varying levels of evidence. There were 24 recommendations based on abstracts, of which 14 (58%) were approved and 10 (42%) were rejected. Eleven recommendations were based exclusively on abstracts, 7 (64%) of which were in favor of the new chemotherapy indication. Among the 20 recommendations not based on an abstract, 10 (50%) were approved and 10 (50%) were rejected. As a comparison, published Randomized Control Trials were part of the evidentiary base in 27 committee recommendations (61%). Of these, 16 (59%) were in approval of a new chemotherapy indication while 11 (41%) were opposed. Conclusion: Research abstracts are commonly involved in evidence based decision making for cancer drug funding. The rates of approving cancer drugs for funding by the Ontario Cancer Drug Approval Committee were similar among recommendations based on abstracts and other levels of evidence.