ReviewClinical Medicine Insights. Oncology2018
Bevacizumab Eligibility in Patients with Metastatic and Recurrent Cervical Cancer: A Retrospective Review.
Review in Clinical Medicine Insights. Oncology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Toripalimab combined with bevacizumab plus chemotherapy as first-line treatment for refractory recurrent or metastatic cervical cancer: a single-arm, open-label, phase II study (JS001-ISS-CO214).Journal of gynecologic oncology · 2025Trial
- QL1604 plus paclitaxel-cisplatin/carboplatin in patients with recurrent or metastatic cervical cancer: an open-label, single-arm, phase II trial.Journal of gynecologic oncology · 2024Trial
- Pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy in Japanese patients with persistent, recurrent or metastatic cervical cancer: Results from KEYNOTE-826.Cancer science · 2022Trial
- The Role of HPV and Hormone in Cervical Precancer and Cancer: Molecular Pathophysiology and Cell Biology of Disease and Treatment.Oncology research · 2026Review
- Case Report: PRaG 3.0 therapy for advanced cervical cancer with severe comorbidities.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Addition of Bevacizumab to Chemotherapy and Its Impact on Clinical Efficacy in Cervical Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Review
- Automated Prediction of Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy Response in Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer Using Hybrid Model-Based MRI Radiomics.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- The potential of PCNA inhibition as a therapeutic strategy in cervical cancer.Journal of medical virology · 2023Review
- The Interplay between Microbiota and Chemotherapy-Derived Metabolites in Breast Cancer.Metabolites · 2023Review
- Article
- Efficacy of paclitaxel, carboplatin, and bevacizumab for cervical cancer: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis.Medicine · 2020Article
- ZRANB2/SNHG20/FOXK1 Axis regulates Vasculogenic mimicry formation in glioma.Journal of experimental & clinical cancer research : CR · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveBevacizumab is approved for use in combination with chemotherapy for metastatic/recurrent cervical cancer (CC), with increased survival/response rates. However, use of bevacizumab is not always feasible or safe. The purpose of this study was to identify the percentage of metastatic/recurrent CC patients at our institution who would have been eligible to receive bevacizumab.
methodsA retrospective study was conducted to identify metastatic/recurrent CC patients treated at UFHealth between 2006 and 2016. Chart review was performed to determine if the patient met bevacizumab eligibility criteria.
resultsIn total, 79 patients with metastatic/recurrent CC were identified; 85.5% would have been ineligible to receive bevacizumab, and 14.5% would have been eligible. The most common reason for exclusion was active bleeding (68.4%); 94% of which was vaginal. In all, 27.6% would be excluded due to poor renal function, and 23.7% due to poor performance status (PS).
conclusionsDespite improved survival, only 14.5% of metastatic/recurrent CC patients treated over a 10-year period would have been eligible to receive bevacizumab. Most patients would have been excluded due to active bleeding, most commonly vaginal bleeding, a common complication from their disease. Identifying novel therapies for metastatic/recurrent CC patients with improved safety profiles that would allow for their use in this challenging population is critical.
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.