Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28448304›Full record

SynthesisInternational journal of gynecological cancer : official journal of the International Gynecological Cancer Society2017

Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Bevacizumab Plus First-Line Topotecan-Paclitaxel or Cisplatin-Paclitaxel Versus Non-Bevacizumab-Containing Therapies in Persistent, Recurrent, or Metastatic Cervical Cancer.

Virginia M Rosen, Ines Guerra, Mary McCormack, Angélica Nogueira-Rodrigues, Andre Sasse, Veronica C Munk, Aijing Shang

Open access · bronzeAbstract readSystematic ReviewNetwork Meta-Analysis
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International journal of gynecological cancer : official journal of the International Gynecological Cancer Society, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 47 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
47citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
6.2field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

47 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 88 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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

7 authors at 6 institutions in 5 countries.

Virginia M Rosen*Optum, Eden Prairie, MN; †Mapi Group, Uxbridge; and ‡University College London Hospitals, London, UK; §Federal University, Belo Horizonte; and ∥State University of Campinas, Campinas, Brazil; and ¶F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Basel, Switzerland.
Ines Guerra
Mary McCormack
Angélica Nogueira-Rodrigues
Andre Sasse
Veronica C Munk
Aijing Shang
Mapi Research Trust · FROptum (United States) · USRoche (Switzerland) · CHRoyal London Hospital · GBUniversidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP) · BRUniversidade Federal de Minas Gerais · BR

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveDespite advances in cervical cancer prevention and diagnosis, outcomes for patients given a diagnosis of advanced and recurrent disease are poor. In the GOG240 trial, the addition of bevacizumab to paclitaxel-topotecan or paclitaxel-cisplatin has been shown to prolong survival compared with paclitaxel-topotecan or paclitaxel-cisplatin in patients with persistent, recurrent, or metastatic disease. However, standards of care vary between regions and countries. The purpose of this systematic review and network meta-analysis was to enable a comparison between bevacizumab + chemotherapy with multiple monotherapy or combination chemotherapy regimens in the treatment for women with advanced, recurrent, or persistent cervical cancer. METHODS/MATERIALS: A systematic literature review was conducted to identify randomized or nonrandomized controlled trials of patients with recurrent, persistent, or metastatic cervical cancer published in English from 1999 to 2015. A feasibility study was performed to assess the heterogeneity of the trials, and a network meta-analysis was conducted. Fixed- and random-effects models were fitted to calculate the hazard ratio for overall survival (OS) for all pairwise comparisons and ranking of all interventions.

resultsTwenty-three studies (19 trials) met inclusion criteria and were included in the review. Sample sizes ranged from 69 to 452, and median patient age ranged from 45 to 53 years. There was a trend toward prolonged OS with cisplatin-paclitaxel-bevacizumab and topotecan-paclitaxel-bevacizumab compared with all non-bevacizumab-containing therapies. Cisplatin-paclitaxel-bevacizumab had the highest probability of being the most efficacious compared with all regimens (68.1%), and cisplatin monotherapy had the lowest (0%).

conclusionsThe results of this network meta-analysis show that bevacizumab in combination with paclitaxel-topotecan or paclitaxel-cisplatin is likely to prolong OS over other non-bevacizumab-containing chemotherapies (eg, paclitaxel-carboplatin), which were not included in the GOG240 trial. In patients with advanced, persistent, and recurrent cervical cancer, cisplatin-paclitaxel-bevacizumab and topotecan-paclitaxel-bevacizumab showed the highest efficacy in all regimens investigated in this analysis.

Indexed as

Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsBevacizumabCisplatinFemaleHumansNeoplasm MetastasisNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalPaclitaxelTopotecanUterine Cervical NeoplasmsBevacizumabCisplatinPaclitaxelTopotecan

Identifiers

PMID28448304
PMCPMC5499964
OpenAlexW2610030900

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.