ArticleThe oncologist2019
Polypharmacy in Patients with Ovarian Cancer.
Article in The oncologist, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development of evidence-based indicators for the detection of drug-related problems among ovarian cancer patients.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2023Article
- Ovarian cancer in the older patient: where are we now? What to do next?Therapeutic advances in medical oncology · 2023Review
- Gene Signatures and Prognostic Values of N6-Methyladenosine Related Genes in Ovarian Cancer.Frontiers in genetics · 2021Article
- Polypharmacy as a prognostic factor in older patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer treated with anti-PD-1/PD-L1 antibody-based immunotherapy.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivePolypharmacy has been associated with morbidity and mortality in patients with cancer. Data about polypharmacy among patients with ovarian cancer are limited. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate polypharmacy in a cohort of patients with ovarian cancer and to assess the evolution of polypharmacy from initial presentation to 2 years posttreatment. A secondary objective was to evaluate differences in polypharmacy between a subset of patients primarily treated in our comprehensive cancer center (CCC) and our safety net hospital (SNH).
methodsWomen treated for ovarian cancer between January 1, 2011, and December 31, 2016, were included. Data were abstracted from the electronic medical record. Medication safety was assessed using the established Anticholinergic Burden (ACB) scale and the Beers criteria. Statistical analyses were performed using paired
resultsThe study included 152 patients. The majority of patients had high-grade serous carcinoma. Hypertension was the most common medical problem. The mean number of medications at the time of diagnosis was 3.72. Paired testing demonstrated significant patient-level increases in the number medications at 2 years following initial diagnosis (4.16 vs. 7.01,
conclusionPolypharmacy worsens as women go through ovarian cancer treatment. Both at initial presentation and at 2 years postdiagnosis, rates of polypharmacy were higher at the CCC. Polypharmacy did not have an effect on survival in this cohort. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Awareness of escalating numbers of medications and potentially adverse interactions is crucial among women with ovarian cancer, who are at high risk for polypharmacy.
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.