Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33357510›Full record

Trial reportThe Lancet. Oncology2021

Objective responses to first-line neoadjuvant carboplatin-paclitaxel regimens for ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal carcinoma (ICON8): post-hoc exploratory analysis of a randomised, phase 3 trial.

Robert D Morgan, Iain A McNeish, Adrian D Cook, Elizabeth C James, Rosemary Lord, Graham Dark, Rosalind M Glasspool, Jonathan Krell, Christine Parkinson, Christopher J Poole and 16 more

Open access · greenAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase IIIRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in The Lancet. Oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
6.6field-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

39 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 58 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Evaluating the Chemical Composition and Antitumor Activity ofInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Article
  15. Genomics of ovarian cancers and the potential of precision medicine.Therapeutic advances in medical oncology · 2025
    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

26 authors at 20 institutions in 3 countries.

Robert D MorganThe Christie NHS Foundation Trust and University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Iain A McNeishOvarian Cancer Action Research Centre, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Adrian D CookMedical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, University College London, London, UK.
Elizabeth C JamesMedical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, University College London, London, UK.
Rosemary LordThe Clatterbridge Cancer Centre NHS Foundation Trust, Bebington, UK.
Graham DarkThe Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Rosalind M GlasspoolBeatson West of Scotland Cancer Centre, Glasgow, UK.
Jonathan KrellOvarian Cancer Action Research Centre, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Christine ParkinsonCambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK.
Christopher J PooleArden Cancer Research Centre, University Hospital Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust, Coventry, UK.
Marcia HallMount Vernon Cancer Centre, Northwood, UK.
Dolores Gallardo-RincónInstituto Nacional de Cancerología, Mexico City, Mexico.
Michelle LockleySt Bartholomew's Hospital, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK.
Sharadah EssapenRoyal Surrey NHS Foundation Trust, Guildford, UK.
Jeff SummersMaidstone and Tunbridge Wells NHS Trust, Kent, UK.
Anjana AnandNottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Nottingham, UK.
Abel ZachariahShrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust, Shrewsbury, UK.
Sarah WilliamsUniversity Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK.
Rachel JonesSouth West Wales Cancer Centre, Singleton Hospital, Swansea, UK.
Kate ScatchardRoyal Devon and Exeter NHS Foundation Trust, Exeter, UK.
Axel WaltherUniversity Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol, UK.
Jae-Weon KimSeoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea.
Sudha SundarPan Birmingham Gynaecological Cancer Centre and University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Gordon C JaysonThe Christie NHS Foundation Trust and University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Jonathan A LedermannUCL Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust and UCL Cancer Institute, London, UK.
Andrew R ClampThe Christie NHS Foundation Trust and University of Manchester, Manchester, UK. Electronic address: andrew.clamp@christie.nhs.uk.
The Christie NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity College London · GBBarts Health NHS Trust · GBBeatson West of Scotland Cancer Centre · GBCambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GBClatterbridge Cancer Centre NHS Foundation Trust · GBImperial College London · GBInstituto Nacional de Cancerología · MXMaidstone and Tunbridge Wells NHS Trust · GBMount Vernon Cancer Centre · GBNewcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GBNottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust · GBOvarian Cancer Action · GBRoyal Devon & Exeter NHS Foundation Trust · GBRoyal Surrey NHS Foundation Trust · GBSeoul National University · KRShrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust · GBSingleton Hospital · GBUniversity College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity Hospital Coventry · GB

Funding

Cancer Research UK 12127Cancer Research UK 13034Cancer Research UK 17092Cancer Research UK 19694Cancer Research UK 29832Cancer Research UK C1489/A12127Cancer Research UK CA1489/A1709Department of HealthMedical Research Council G1100425Medical Research Council MC_UU_12023/20Medical Research Council MC_UU_12023/25Medical Research Council MC_UU_12023/9
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPlatinum-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by delayed primary surgery (DPS) is an established strategy for women with newly diagnosed, advanced-stage epithelial ovarian cancer. Although this therapeutic approach has been validated in randomised, phase 3 trials, evaluation of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1 (RECIST), and cancer antigen 125 (CA125) has not been reported. We describe RECIST and Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup (GCIG) CA125 responses in patients receiving platinum-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by DPS in the ICON8 trial.

methodsICON8 was an international, multicentre, randomised, phase 3 trial done across 117 hospitals in the UK, Australia, New Zealand, Mexico, South Korea, and Ireland. The trial included women aged 18 years or older with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2, life expectancy of more than 12 weeks, and newly diagnosed International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO; 1988) stage IC-IIA high-grade serous, clear cell, or any poorly differentiated or grade 3 histological subtype, or any FIGO (1988) stage IIB-IV epithelial cancer of the ovary, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneum. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive intravenous carboplatin (area under the curve [AUC]5 or AUC6) and intravenous paclitaxel (175 mg/m

findingsBetween June 6, 2011, and Nov 28, 2014, 1566 women were enrolled in ICON8, of whom 779 (50%) were planned for neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by DPS. Median follow-up was 29·5 months (IQR 15·6-54·3) for the neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by DPS population. Of 564 women who had RECIST-evaluable disease at trial entry, 348 (62%) had a complete or partial response. Of 727 women who were evaluable by GCIG CA125 criteria at the time of diagnosis, 610 (84%) had a CA125 response. Median progression-free survival was 14·4 months (95% CI 9·2-28·0; 297 events) for patients with a RECIST complete or partial response and 13·3 months (8·1-20·1; 171 events) for those with RECIST stable disease. Median progression-free survival for women with a GCIG CA125 response was 13·8 months (95% CI 8·8-23·4; 544 events) and 9·7 months (5·8-14·5; 111 events) for those without a GCIG CA125 response. Complete cytoreduction (R0) was achieved in 187 (56%) of 335 women with a RECIST complete or partial response and 73 (42%) of 172 women with RECIST stable disease. Complete cytoreduction was achieved in 290 (50%) of 576 women with a GCIG CA125 response and 30 (30%) of 101 women without a GCIG CA125 response.

interpretationThe RECIST-defined radiological response rate was lower than that frequently quoted to patients in the clinic. RECIST and GCIG CA125 responses to neoadjuvant chemotherapy for epithelial ovarian cancer should not be used as individual predictive markers to stratify patients who are likely to benefit from DPS, but instead used in conjunction with the patient's clinical capacity to undergo cytoreductive surgery. A patient should not be denied surgery based solely on the lack of a RECIST or GCIG CA125 response.

fundingCancer Research UK, UK Medical Research Council, Health Research Board in Ireland, Irish Cancer Society, and Cancer Australia.

Indexed as

AgedAustraliaCA-125 AntigenCarboplatinDisease-Free SurvivalFallopian Tube NeoplasmsFallopian TubesFemaleHumansIrelandMembrane ProteinsMiddle AgedNeoadjuvant TherapyNew ZealandOvarian NeoplasmsPaclitaxelCA-125 AntigenCarboplatinMembrane ProteinsMUC16 protein, humanPaclitaxel

Identifiers

PMID33357510
PMCPMC7616995
OpenAlexW3113531122

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.