ArticleJCO oncology practice2021
Characterization of the Early Years of Bevacizumab Use for First-Line Treatment of Ovarian Cancer in the United States.
Article in JCO oncology practice, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo quantify early dissemination patterns, factors influencing use, and costs of bevacizumab (BEV) for the treatment of newly diagnosed ovarian cancer (OC) in the United States before its regulatory approval for this indication (off-label use).
methodsWe identified women 18-65 years of age with newly diagnosed OC treated with surgery and platinum-based chemotherapy from 2008 to 2016 through the MarketScan database (N = 8,109). The proportion of women receiving BEV over time was calculated, multivariate logistic regression used to determine factors associated with BEV use, and total costs per cycle of chemotherapy with and without BEV abstracted.
resultsBEV utilization rose 1.8-fold during the study period, from 4.1% (2008) to 7.4 % (2016). BEV was used with non-platinum/taxane regimens over a third of the time (37.2%). Physician specialty (medical oncology
conclusionOff-label use of BEV for newly diagnosed OC was rare (< 10%), but doubled following presentation of phase II and III data at international meetings. Both clinical (ascites, metastatic disease, and age) and nonclinical (specialty and region) factors were associated with BEV use, and its use was accompanied by a six-fold increase in the cost of one cycle of treatment.
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.