ArticleGynecologic oncology reports2017
Repeating platinum/bevacizumab in recurrent or progressive cervical cancer yields marginal survival benefits.
Article in Gynecologic oncology reports, 2017. 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, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Signal mining and risk analysis of tisotumab vedotin adverse events based on the FAERS database.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Recent therapeutic advances in gynecologic oncology: evolving roles of immunotherapy, antibody-drug conjugates, and clinical trial innovations.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Our objective was to assess overall survival of cervical cancer patients following prior platinum/bevacizumab chemotherapy, comparing retreatment with platinum/bevacizumab with alternative therapies. A retrospective analysis was performed of women who received platinum/bevacizumab (PB) chemotherapy for cervical cancer at Washington University between July 1, 2005 and December 31, 2015. Wilcoxon rank-sum exact test and Fisher's exact test were used to compare the treatment groups, and Kaplan Meier curves were generated. Cox regression analyses were performed, with treatment free interval and prior therapy response included as covariates. Of 84 patients who received PB chemotherapy, 59 (70%) received no second line chemotherapy, as they did not recur, progressed without further chemotherapy, were lost to follow up, or expired. Of the remaining 25 patients, 9 were retreated with the combination of platinum/bevacizumab (PB), 6 were retreated with a platinum regimen without bevacizumab (P), and 10 were retreated with neither (not-P). The only long-term survivor was in the not-P group and was treated with an immunotherapy agent. Median overall survival of all patients was 7.1 months. There was a marginal difference in survival between women in the PB and not-PB groups (11.8 versus 5.7 months; HR 3.02, 95% CI, 0.98-9.28). There was no difference in survival based on platinum interval (HR 0.81; 95% CI, 0.27-2.45). Outcomes are grim for women retreated after platinum/bevacizumab therapy and are only marginally improved by retreatment with a platinum/bevacizumab regimen. Rather than additional PB therapy, women with cervical cancer who recur after platinum/bevacizumab should consider supportive care or clinical trials.
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.