ArticleThe Journal of international medical research2021
Phase I study of intraperitoneal bevacizumab for treating refractory malignant ascites.
Article in The Journal of international medical research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Phase I/II Clinical Study of PRaG Regimen Combined With Intraperitoneal Infusion of PD-1 Inhibitor for Advanced Refractory Solid Tumors With Cancerous Ascites (PRaG4.0P Study).Technology in cancer research & treatmentTrial
- Combined Intraperitoneal and Systemic Chemotherapy for Peritoneal Metastases: Drug Delivery Concepts, Pharmacokinetics, and Clinical Applications: A Narrative Review.Pharmaceutics · 2026Review
- Emerging innovative immunotherapies in malignant ascites: current landscape, challenges and perspectives.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
- Article
- Innovative landscapes in intraperitoneal therapy of ovarian cancer.Drug delivery and translational research · 2025Review
- Contemporary Management of Malignant Ascites.The Journal of surgical research · 2025Review
- A safe and effective treatment for refractory malignant ascites: the use of pigtail catheters.Polish journal of radiology · 2024Article
- Tumor vessel normalization and immunotherapy in gastric cancer.Therapeutic advances in medical oncology · 2022Review
- Current Treatments and New Possible Complementary Therapies for Epithelial Ovarian Cancer.Biomedicines · 2021Review
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis prospective, dose-escalation phase I study evaluated the safety and efficacy of intraperitoneal bevacizumab in managing refractory malignant ascites and explored the recommended dose of bevacizumab for further study.
methodsPatients with refractory malignant ascites were enrolled. Bevacizumab was intraperitoneal administered weekly at an initial dose of 2.5 mg/kg, with dose escalation to 5 and 7.5 mg/kg performed following the standard "3 + 3" rule. The total duration of treatment was 2 or 3 weeks.
resultsBetween December 2013 and September 2014, 13 patients (2.5 mg/kg, n = 4; 5 mg/kg, n = 3; 7.5 mg/kg, n = 6) with refractory malignant ascites were enrolled. Bevacizumab was well tolerated, and the most common treatment-related adverse events were abdominal pain (5/13), abdominal distension (2/13), and fatigue (2/13). The dose-limiting toxicity at 7.5 mg/kg was grade 3 bowel obstruction (1/13). The maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was not reached. The overall response and disease control rates were 7.7 and 61.5%, respectively.
conclusionsIntraperitoneal bevacizumab safe and well tolerated for treating malignant ascites, and the MTD was not reached at doses of 2.5 to 7.5 mg/kg. Intraperitoneal bevacizumab at 7.5 mg/kg weekly is recommended for further study to verify its anti-tumor activity.
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.