Trial reportInvestigational new drugs2013
Investigation of bendamustine HCL in a phase 2 study in women with resistant ovarian cancer.
Trial report in Investigational new drugs, 2013. 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, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
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
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
We investigated the safety and efficacy of 90 mg/m(2) bendamustine HCL, administered intravenously on days 1 and 2 every 28 days in 10 women with platinum and taxane resistant epithelial ovarian cancer. There were no objective tumor responses observed; 2 patients had stable disease. Plasma samples collected at pre-treatment and end of cycle one were analyzed for changes in circulating total cytokeratin 18 and caspase cleaved cytokeratin 18 as exploratory early biomarkers of bendamustine-induced tumor cell death. All patients had measureable levels of both total and cleaved caspase 3 cytokeratin 18, but no relationship with response was possible due to the lack of clinical benefit in treated patients. Due to the high incidence of adverse events and absence of objective responses, only ten patients were treated as predefined by the Simon Two-Stage Design in the protocol. Overall, the regimen was not well tolerated and was associated with fatigue and a greater number of gastrointestinal side effects as compared to previously reported experiences in different patient populations. However, our study subjects did experience less bone marrow suppression. The lack of tolerability could reflect the degree of tumor burden within the peritoneal cavity as well as the high number of prior regimens (median of 5) received by the patients participating in this study.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.