ArticleBritish journal of cancer2013
Patients' and oncologists' views on the treatment and care of advanced ovarian cancer in the U.K.: results from the ADVOCATE study.
Article in British journal of cancer, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 34 citations in OpenAlex.
- Quality of life versus length of life considerations in cancer patients: A systematic literature review.Psycho-oncology · 2019Pooled it
- Factors associated with health-related quality of life in survivors of childhood-onset and adult-onset cancer compared to controls.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026Article
- Anxiety about recurrence or metastasis after nephrectomy and perspectives on and preferences for adjuvant therapy among patients with renal cell carcinoma in Japan: a cross-sectional web-based survey.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- The Impact of HAPPY (Humanity Assurance Protocol in Interventional Radiotherapy) on the Psychological Well-being of Gynecological Cancer Patients.Current radiopharmaceuticals · 2024Article
- Minimally Invasive versus Open Surgery for Spinal Metastasis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Asian spine journal · 2022Article
- Factors associated with the uptake of biosimilars for breast cancer treatment from the perspectives of physicians and patients-Evidence from China.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2022Article
- Unmet needs in non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer from the Japanese patient perspective: a discrete choice experiment.BMJ open · 2021Observational
- Understanding Treatment Strategies and Preferences in Nonmetastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer From the Japanese Physician Perspective.JCO global oncology · 2021Article
- Kidney cancer survivorship care: Patient experiences in a Canadian setting.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2020Article
- HAPPY - Humanity Assurance Protocol in interventional radiotheraPY (brachytherapy) - an AIRO Interventional Radiotherapy Study Group project.Journal of contemporary brachytherapy · 2019Article
- Patient and Physician Preferences for Therapy Characteristics for Psoriasis: A Discrete Choice Experiment in Japan.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2019Article
- Development and validation of the patient roles and responsibilities scale in cancer patients.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2018Article
- Patient Preferences and Urologist Judgments on Prostate Cancer Therapy in Japan.American journal of men's health · 2018Article
- Comparison of veterinary health services expectations and perceptions between oncologic pet owners, non-oncologic pet owners and veterinary staff using the SERVQUAL methodology.Veterinary world · 2016Article
- Ovarian cancer.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2016Review
- Fighting cancer together: Development and implementation of shared medical appointments to standardize and improve chemotherapy education.Gynecologic oncology · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMost patients presenting with advanced ovarian cancer (AOC) eventually relapse. Symptom palliation, maintenance of quality of life (QoL) and prolongation of life are primary therapeutic goals.
methodsSixty-six U.K. oncologists completed an online survey about AOC management. Two hundred and two patients were interviewed about care, treatment experiences and expectations.
resultsPrior to diagnosis, 34% (69 out of 202) of women had > or =3 symptoms associated with AOC. Twenty-one per cent (43 out of 202) thought poor symptom recognition by general practitioners (GPs) delayed diagnosis. Amelioration of side effects experienced was variable, for example, only 54% (68 out of 127) distressed by alopecia had received sufficient information about it. Clinicians were asked 'What minimum gain in progression-free survival (PFS) would make you feel it worthwhile to offer maintenance therapy?'; 48% (24 out of 50) indicated 5-6 months, but 52% (26 out of 50) believed patients would find PFS of 3-4 months acceptable. When patients were presented with hypothetical scenarios, 33% (52 out of 160) would require 1-2 months extra life, 6% (10 out of 160) 3-4 months, 31% (49 out of 160) 5-6 months, and 31% (49 out of 160) > or =7 months. However, 86% (173 out of 202) would accept treatment that improved QoL without prolongation of life. When asked what was most important, 33% (67 out of 201) said QoL, 9% (19 out of 201) length of life and 57% (115 out of 201) said both were equally important.
conclusionClinicians' and patients' experiences, expectations and priorities about OC management may differ.
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.