ArticleGynecologic oncology2014
SGO guidance document for clinical trial designs in ovarian cancer: a changing paradigm.
Article in Gynecologic oncology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cost-effectiveness analysis comparing "PARP inhibitors-for-all" to the biomarker-directed use of PARP inhibitor maintenance therapy for newly diagnosed advanced stage ovarian cancer.Gynecologic oncology · 2020Article
- Ovarian cancer.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2016Review
- An apoptosis-enhancing drug overcomes platinum resistance in a tumour-initiating subpopulation of ovarian cancer.Nature communications · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo explore and facilitate the multifaceted process of drug development and regulatory approval in ovarian cancer.
methodsThe Society of Gynecologic Oncology (SGO) recently sought and received input from multiple stakeholders including the National Cancer Institute's (NCI) Clinical Therapy Evaluation Program (CTEP), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), pharmaceutical industry, and patient advocates. This whitepaper is the work product and opinion solely of the SGO.
resultsThis document summarizes the SGO's interpretation of these meetings and the current regulatory environment where there has been a paucity of recent approvals in the United States. It provides guidance in clinical trial design with the express purpose of encouraging novel drug development in ovarian cancer. Points of emphasis include: ovarian cancer heterogeneity (histologic subtypes and molecular genetic alterations), clinical trial design elements, surrogate as well as composite endpoints, and the four principles of clinical drug development (unmet medical need, discovery, safety, and efficacy).
conclusionsThere has been an evolution in the acceptance of surrogate endpoints depending upon the clinical setting in ovarian cancer. While overall survival (OS) remains the most objective clinical trial endpoint, there is now realization that demanding OS as the primary endpoint has many obstacles. Ovarian cancer is a heterogeneous disease that is now divided by histologic subtypes. Future registration strategies will need to address disease heterogeneity. The exploration of currently acceptable clinical trial endpoints and alternative regulatory strategies will hopefully stimulate interest in novel drug development for patients with ovarian cancer.
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.