Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27993805›Full record

ArticleAnnals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology2017

Fifth Ovarian Cancer Consensus Conference of the Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup: recurrent disease.

M K Wilson, E Pujade-Lauraine, D Aoki, M R Mirza, D Lorusso, A M Oza, A du Bois, I Vergote, A Reuss, M Bacon and 14 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract readConsensus Statement
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07540403 (Survival Analysis in patiEnts With Bad Prognosis Epithelial Ovarian CArcinoma), which is not on this map. Cited by 125 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
125citing papers in PubMed, 8 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT07540403 recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Survival Analysis in patiEnts With Bad Prognosis Epithelial Ovarian CArcinoma

Typeobservational_patient_registrySponsorFondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCSRan2025 to 2027Enrolled50ConditionsOvarian Cancer
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

125 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. SEOM-GEICO clinical guideline on epithelial ovarian cancer (2023).Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2024
    Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. EANM guideline on the role of 2-[European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2021
    Guideline
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Prognostic significance of autophagy-related genesThe Journal of international medical research · 2020
    Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Phase II randomized study of PM01183 versus topotecan in patients with platinum-resistant/refractory advanced ovarian cancer.Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology · 2017
    Trial
  20. Review

65 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

24 authors.

M K WilsonANZGOG, Sydney, Australia-New Zealand.
E Pujade-LauraineGINECO, Paris, France.
D AokiJGOG, Tokyo, Japan.
M R MirzaNSGO, Copenhagen, Scandinavia.
D LorussoMITO, Milano, Italy.
A M OzaPMHC, Toronto, Canada.
A du BoisAGO, Essen, Germany.
I VergoteBGOG, Leuven, Kingdom of Belgium.
A ReussAGO, Essen, Germany.
M BaconGCIG, Kingston, Canada.
M FriedlanderANZGOG, Sydney, Australia-New Zealand.
D Gallardo-RinconGICOM, Mexico.
F JolyGINECO, Paris, France.
S-J ChangKGOG, Suwon, Korea.
A M FerreroManGO, Turin, Italy.
R J EdmondsonMRC/NCRI, Gateshead, UK.
P WimbergerNOGGO, Dresden, Germany.
J MaenpaaNSGO, Copenhagen, Scandinavia.
D GaffneyRTOG, Salt Lake City, USA.
R ZangSGOG, Shanghai, China.
A OkamotoJGOG, Tokyo, Japan.
G StuartCCTG, Vancouver, Canada.
K OchiaiJGOG, Tokyo, Japan.
participants of the Fifth Ovarian Cancer Consensus Conference

Funding

Huntsman Cancer Institute/ University of Utah Network Lead Academic Participating Site ApplicationUG1CA233178 · NCI · UTAH STATE HIGHER EDUCATION SYSTEM--UNIVERSITY OF UTAH · PI Matthew Poppe, Heloisa Prado Soares · 2019 to 2026
$4.9M
Huntsman Cancer Institute/Univ of Utah Network Lead Academic Participating SiteU10CA180818 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF UTAH · PI GAFFNEY, DAVID K · 2014 to 2018
$3.2M
NCI NIH HHS U10 CA180818NCI NIH HHS UG1 CA233178
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This manuscript reports the consensus statements regarding recurrent ovarian cancer (ROC), reached at the fifth Ovarian Cancer Consensus Conference (OCCC), which was held in Tokyo, Japan, in November 2015. Three important questions were identified: (i) What are the subgroups for clinical trials in ROC? The historical definition of using platinum-free interval (PFI) to categorise patients as having platinum-sensitive/resistant disease was replaced by therapy-free interval (TFI). TFI can be broken down into TFIp (PFI), TFInp (non-PFI) and TFIb (biological agent-free interval). Additional criteria to consider include histology, BRCA mutation status, number/type of previous therapies, outcome of prior surgery and patient reported symptoms. (ii) What are the control arms for clinical trials in ROC? When platinum is considered the best option, the control arm should be a platinum-based therapy with or without an anti-angiogenic agent or a poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor. If platinum is not considered the best option, the control arm could include a non-platinum drug, either as single agent or in combination. (iii) What are the endpoints for clinical trials in ROC? Overall survival (OS) is the preferred endpoint for patient cohorts with an expected median OS < or = 12 months. Progression-free survival (PFS) is an alternative, and it is the preferred endpoint when the expected median OS is > 12 months. However, PFS alone should not be the only endpoint and must be supported by additional endpoints including pre-defined patient reported outcomes (PROs), time to second subsequent therapy (TSST), or time until definitive deterioration of quality of life (TUDD).

Indexed as

Research DesignFemaleHumansNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalOvarian Neoplasmsclinical trialsovarian cancerrecurrent disease

Identifiers

PMID27993805
PMCPMC6246494

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.