Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26657509›Full record

SynthesisOncotarget2016

Efficacy and toxicity of bevacizumab in recurrent ovarian disease: an update meta-analysis on phase III trials.

Claudia Marchetti, Francesca De Felice, Innocenza Palaia, Angela Musella, Violante Di Donato, Maria Luisa Gasparri, Daniela Musio, Ludovico Muzii, Vincenzo Tombolini, Pierluigi Benedetti Panici

Open access · diamondAbstract readMeta-Analysis
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Oncotarget, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
5.5field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Advances in ovarian cancer therapy.Cancer chemotherapy and pharmacology · 2018
    Review
  12. Article
  13. 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 2 institutions in 1 country.

Claudia MarchettiDepartment of Obstetrics-Gynecological Sciences and Urological Sciences, Policlinico Umberto I "Sapienza" University of Rome, Viale del Policlinico, Rome 00161, Italy.
Francesca De FeliceDepartment of Radiotherapy, Policlinico Umberto I "Sapienza" University of Rome, Viale Regina Elena, Rome 00161, Italy.
Innocenza PalaiaDepartment of Obstetrics-Gynecological Sciences and Urological Sciences, Policlinico Umberto I "Sapienza" University of Rome, Viale del Policlinico, Rome 00161, Italy.
Angela MusellaDepartment of Obstetrics-Gynecological Sciences and Urological Sciences, Policlinico Umberto I "Sapienza" University of Rome, Viale del Policlinico, Rome 00161, Italy.
Violante Di DonatoDepartment of Obstetrics-Gynecological Sciences and Urological Sciences, Policlinico Umberto I "Sapienza" University of Rome, Viale del Policlinico, Rome 00161, Italy.
Maria Luisa GasparriDepartment of Obstetrics-Gynecological Sciences and Urological Sciences, Policlinico Umberto I "Sapienza" University of Rome, Viale del Policlinico, Rome 00161, Italy.
Daniela MusioDepartment of Radiotherapy, Policlinico Umberto I "Sapienza" University of Rome, Viale Regina Elena, Rome 00161, Italy.
Ludovico MuziiDepartment of Obstetrics-Gynecological Sciences and Urological Sciences, Policlinico Umberto I "Sapienza" University of Rome, Viale del Policlinico, Rome 00161, Italy.
Vincenzo TomboliniDepartment of Radiotherapy, Policlinico Umberto I "Sapienza" University of Rome, Viale Regina Elena, Rome 00161, Italy.
Pierluigi Benedetti PaniciDepartment of Obstetrics-Gynecological Sciences and Urological Sciences, Policlinico Umberto I "Sapienza" University of Rome, Viale del Policlinico, Rome 00161, Italy.
Sapienza University of Rome · ITPoliclinico Umberto I · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo analyze the efficacy and toxicity of bevacizumab on survival outcomes in recurrent ovarian cancer.

resultsBevacizumab was associated with significant improvement of PFS and OS compared with standard treatment with HRs of 0.53 (95% CI 0.44 - 0.63; p < 0.00001) and 0.87 (95% CI, 0.77 to 0.99; p = 0.03), respectively.Bevacizumab increased the incidence of G3/G4 hypertension (RR 19.01, 95% CI 7.77 - 46.55; p < 0.00001), proteinuria (RR 17.31, 95% CI 5.42 - 55.25; p < 0.00001), arterial thromboembolic events (ATE) (RR 4.99, 95% CI 1.29 - 19.27; p = 0.02) and bleeding (RR 3.14, 95% CI 1.35 - 7.32; p = 0.008). MATERIALS AND

methodsThree randomized phase III trials representing 1502 patients were identified.Pooled hazard ratio (HR), odd ratio (OR), risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated using fixed or random effects model.

conclusionsAdding bevacizumab to standard chemotherapy improved ORR, PFS and OS, and it had a higher, but manageable, incidence of toxicities graded 3 to 4.

Indexed as

Angiogenesis InhibitorsAntineoplastic AgentsBevacizumabCarcinoma, Ovarian EpithelialClinical Trials, Phase III as TopicDisease-Free SurvivalFemaleHumansNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalNeoplasms, Glandular and EpithelialOvarian NeoplasmsTreatment OutcomeAngiogenesis InhibitorsAntineoplastic AgentsBevacizumabbevacizumabovarian cancerrecurrentsurvivaltoxicity

Identifiers

PMID26657509
PMCPMC4914353
OpenAlexW2201813638

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.