Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24361733›Full record

Trial reportGynecologic oncology2014

A phase II evaluation of AMG 102 (rilotumumab) in the treatment of persistent or recurrent epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube or primary peritoneal carcinoma: a Gynecologic Oncology Group study.

Lainie P Martin, Michael Sill, Mark S Shahin, Matthew Powell, Paul DiSilvestro, Lisa M Landrum, Stephanie L Gaillard, Michael J Goodheart, James Hoffman, Russell J Schilder

Abstract readClinical Trial, Phase IIMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in Gynecologic oncology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed
6.4field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 10 institutions in 1 country.

Lainie P MartinDept. of Medical Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA 19111, USA. Electronic address: lainie.martin@fccc.edu.
Michael SillGynecologic Oncology Group Statistical & Data Center, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY 14263, USA.
Mark S ShahinDept. of Clinical Gynecologic Oncology, Hanjani Institute for Gynecologic Oncology, Abington Memorial Hospital, Abington, PA 19001, USA.
Matthew PowellDept. of OB/GYN, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO 63110, USA.
Paul DiSilvestroProgram in Women's Oncology, Women & Infants Hospital/Alpert School of Medicine, Providence, RI 02905, USA.
Lisa M LandrumDept. of OB/GYN, Oklahoma University Health Science Center, Oklahoma City, OK 73104, USA.
Stephanie L GaillardDept. of Gynecologic Oncology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC 27710, USA.
Michael J GoodheartDept. of Gynecologic Oncology, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, IA 52242, USA.
James HoffmanDept. of Gynecologic Oncology, The Hospital of Central Connecticut, New Britain, CT 06050, USA.
Russell J SchilderDept. of Medical Oncology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA 19107, USA.
Abington Memorial Hospital · USDuke Medical Center · USFox Chase Cancer Center · USGynecologic Oncology Group · USOU HealthProvidence College · USThe Hospital of Central Connecticut · USThomas Jefferson University · USUniversity of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics · USWashington University in St. Louis · US

Funding

NRG Oncology Network Group Operations Center - GY9 BIQSFP Reports/BudgetsU10CA180868 · NCI · NRG ONCOLOGY FOUNDATION, INC. · PI NORMAN WOLMARK · 2014 to 2026
$206.8M
Statistics CoreU10CA180822 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI Mei-Yin C Polley · 2014 to 2026
$146.4M
GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY GROUP HEADQUARTERSU10CA027469 · NCI · GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY GROUP · PI DISAIA, PHILIP J. · 1985 to 2013
$132.6M
GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY GROUP STATISTICAL OFFICEU10CA037517 · NCI · ROSWELL PARK CANCER INSTITUTE CORP · PI BLESSING, JOHN A · 1985 to 2013
$67.4M
ONCOLOGY: CHEMOTHERAPY, IMMUNOLOGY, BIOLOGYT32CA009071 · NCI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI Mary Y Armanios, Nilofer S. Azad · 1985 to 2026
$12.8M
NCTN Lead Academic Participating Site at Dana-Farber/Partners Cancer CareUG1CA233180 · NCI · DANA-FARBER CANCER INST · PI Harold John Burstein · 2019 to 2026
$8.6M
NCTN Lead Academic Participating Site at Dana-Farber/Partners Cancer CareU10CA180867 · NCI · DANA-FARBER CANCER INST · PI BURSTEIN, HAROLD JOHN, KIBEL, ADAM S · 2014 to 2018
$6.2M
NCI NIH HHS CA 27469NCI NIH HHS CA 37517NCI NIH HHS U10 CA027469NCI NIH HHS U10 CA037517NCI NIH HHS U10 CA180822NCI NIH HHS U10 CA180867NCI NIH HHS U10 CA180868NCI NIH HHS UG1 CA233180
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThis open-label, multi-institutional phase II trial evaluated activity and safety of rilotumumab (AMG 102), a monoclonal antibody that targets HGF (hepatocyte growth factor), the ligand for the MET receptor, in women with recurrent or persistent epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube or primary peritoneal cancer. PATIENTS AND

methodsWomen were eligible for treatment with rilotumumab if they had measurable disease, a performance status of 0, 1 or 2, previously received platinum-based therapy with a progression-free interval of <12 months or a second recurrence, and adequate bone marrow and organ function. Patients received rilotumumab 20mg/kg IV every 14 days until evidence of unacceptable toxicity or disease progression. The study utilized co-dual primary endpoints of tumor response and six-month PFS to assess the efficacy of rilotumumab. Secondary endpoints included the frequency and severity of adverse events and the duration of progression-free and overall survival.

resultsThirty-one women enrolled and received rilotumumab. All were eligible for analysis. One patient achieved a complete response (3.2%; 90% CI 0.2-14%), and two women had 6-month PFS (6.5%; 90% CI 1.1-19%). Most adverse events were grade 1 or 2, with no grade 4 adverse events. Grade 3 adverse events were gastrointestinal (4), metabolic (3) anemia (3), a thromboembolic event (1), ventricular tachycardia (1), hypotension during infusion (1) and fatigue (1). The study was stopped after the first stage of accrual.

conclusionRilotumumab was well-tolerated, but had limited activity. The level of activity does not warrant further evaluation of rilotumumab as a single agent in patients with ovarian cancer.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overAntibodies, MonoclonalAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedCarcinoma, Ovarian EpithelialDisease-Free SurvivalFallopian Tube NeoplasmsFemaleHumansMiddle AgedNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalNeoplasms, Glandular and EpithelialOvarian NeoplasmsPeritoneal NeoplasmsSurvival RateAntibodies, MonoclonalAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedrilotumumabAMG 102Clinical trialHGFOVARIAN CANCERRilotumumab METScatter factor

Identifiers

PMID24361733
PMCPMC4469031
OpenAlexW2119569797

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.