Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26216729›Full record

Trial reportGynecologic oncology2015

Ascites predicts treatment benefit of bevacizumab in front-line therapy of advanced epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube and peritoneal cancers: an NRG Oncology/GOG study.

James S Ferriss, James J Java, Michael A Bookman, Gini F Fleming, Bradley J Monk, Joan L Walker, Howard D Homesley, Jeffrey Fowler, Benjamin E Greer, Matthew P Boente and 1 more

Abstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Gynecologic oncology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
11.0field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

39 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 83 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Final Overall Survival of a Randomized Trial of Bevacizumab for Primary Treatment of Ovarian Cancer.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2019
    Trial
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. The complex role of IL-10 in malignant ascites: a review.Cancer immunology, immunotherapy : CII · 2024
    Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  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

11 authors at 10 institutions in 1 country.

James S FerrissTemple University School of Medicine & Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, United States.
James J JavaGynecologic Oncology Group Statistical & Data Center, Buffalo, NY, United States.
Michael A BookmanArizona Oncology, Tucson, AZ, United States.
Gini F FlemingUniversity of Chicago Medical Center, Chicago, IL, United States.
Bradley J MonkSt Joseph's Hospital, Creighton School of Medicine, Phoenix, AZ, United States.
Joan L WalkerUniversity of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, OK, United States.
Howard D HomesleyGynecologic Oncology Group, Buffalo, NY, United States.
Jeffrey FowlerOhio State University, Columbus, OH, United States.
Benjamin E GreerUniversity of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States.
Matthew P BoenteMinnesota Oncology, Edina, MN, United States.
Robert A BurgerUniversity of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States. Electronic address: burgerr@uphs.upenn.edu.
Gynecologic Oncology Group · USArizona Oncology · USFox Chase Cancer Center · USMinnesota Oncology · USOklahoma City University · USSt. Joseph's Hospital · USThe Ohio State University · USUniversity of Chicago Medical Center · USUniversity of Pennsylvania Health System · USUniversity of Washington · 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
OSU as Network Lead Academic Participating Site for the NCI NCTNU10CA180850 · NCI · OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY · PI BLUM, KRISTIE A, CHAKRAVARTI, ARNAB · 2014 to 2018
$6.8M
NCI NIH HHS CA 27469NCI NIH HHS CA 37517NCI NIH HHS U10 CA027469NCI NIH HHS U10 CA037517NCI NIH HHS U10 CA180822NCI NIH HHS U10 CA180850NCI NIH HHS U10 CA180868NCI NIH HHS U10CA 180868
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesPredictive factors for efficacy of bevacizumab in advanced ovarian cancer have remained elusive. We investigated ascites both as a prognostic factor and as a predictor of efficacy for bevacizumab.

methodsUsing data from GOG 0218, patients receiving cytotoxic therapy plus concurrent and maintenance bevacizumab were compared to those receiving cytotoxic therapy plus placebo. The presence of ascites was determined prospectively. Chi-square and Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney tests compared baseline variables between subgroups. Survival was estimated by Kaplan-Meier method, and Cox proportional hazard models were used to evaluate independent prognostic factors and estimate their covariate-adjusted effects on survival.

resultsTreatment arms were balanced with respect to ascites and other prognostic factors. Overall, 886 (80%) women had ascites, 221 (20%) did not. Those with ascites were more likely to have: poorer performance status (p<0.001); serous histology (p=0.012); higher baseline CA125 (p<0.001); and suboptimal cytoreduction (p=0.004). In multivariate survival analysis, ascites was prognostic of poor OS (Adjusted HR 1.22, 95% CI 1.00-1.48, p=0.045), but not PFS. In predictive analysis, patients without ascites treated with bevacizumab had no significant improvement in either PFS (AHR 0.81, 95% CI 0.59-1.10, p=0.18) or OS (AHR 0.94, 95% CI 0.65-1.36, p=0.76). Patients with ascites treated with bevacizumab had significantly improved PFS (AHR 0.71, 95% CI 0.62-0.81, p<0.001) and OS (AHR 0.82, 95% CI 0.70-0.96, p=0.014).

conclusionsAscites in women with advanced ovarian cancer is prognostic of poor overall survival. Ascites may predict the population of women more likely to derive long-term benefit from bevacizumab.

Indexed as

Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsAscitesBevacizumabCarcinoma, Ovarian EpithelialFallopian Tube NeoplasmsFemaleHumansMiddle AgedNeoplasms, Glandular and EpithelialOvarian NeoplasmsPeritoneal NeoplasmsPredictive Value of TestsPrognosisBevacizumabAdvanced epithelial ovarian cancerBevacizumabFront-line therapyGOGNRG Oncology

Identifiers

PMID26216729
PMCPMC4600605
OpenAlexW1653750710

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.