Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35188221›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2022

Weekly versus tri-weekly paclitaxel with carboplatin for first-line treatment in women with epithelial ovarian cancer.

Natalie Yl Ngoi, Nicholas Lx Syn, Robby M Goh, Boon Cher Goh, Ruby Yun-Ju Huang, Yu Yang Soon, Elizabeth James, Adrian Cook, Andrew Clamp, David Sp Tan

Open access · greenAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 26% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Clinicopathological insights and prognostic implications of DEK in association with apoptosis-regulating factors in ovarian cancer.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2025
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Advances in the role of GPX3 in ovarian cancer (Review).International journal of oncology · 2024
    Article
  13. Identifying Explainable Machine Learning Models and a Novel SFRP2International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Article
  14. Observational
  15. Natural Taxanes: From Plant Composition to Human Pharmacology and Toxicity.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Review
  16. Article
  17. 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

10 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Natalie Yl NgoiDepartment of Haematology-Oncology, National University Cancer Institute, Singapore, Singapore.
Nicholas Lx SynDepartment of Haematology-Oncology, National University Cancer Institute, Singapore, Singapore.
Robby M GohDepartment of Haematology-Oncology, National University Cancer Institute, Singapore, Singapore.
Boon Cher GohDepartment of Haematology-Oncology, National University Cancer Institute, Singapore, Singapore.
Ruby Yun-Ju HuangCancer Science Institute of Singapore, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Yu Yang SoonDepartment of Radiation Oncology, National University Cancer Institute, Singapore, Singapore.
Elizabeth JamesMedical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, University College London, London, UK.
Adrian CookMedical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, University College London, London, UK.
Andrew ClampDepartment of Medical Oncology, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust and University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
David Sp TanDepartment of Haematology-Oncology, National University Cancer Institute, Singapore, Singapore.
National University Cancer Institute, Singapore · SGMedical Research Council · GBNational University of Singapore · SGUniversity of Manchester · GB

Funding

Cancer Research UK 12127Cancer Research UK 17092
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEpithelial ovarian cancer is the sixth most common cancer worldwide: 295,414 new cases were diagnosed in 2018, with 184,799 deaths. The lack of an effective screening strategy has led to the majority of women being diagnosed at an advanced stage. For these women, intravenous carboplatin combined with paclitaxel for six cycles is widely accepted as the standard first-line treatment for epithelial ovarian cancer, in combination with debulking surgery. However, there is conflicting evidence regarding the optimal dosing schedule of paclitaxel when combined with carboplatin in this setting.

objectivesTo compare the efficacy and tolerability of intravenous weekly paclitaxel with that of tri-weekly paclitaxel, in combination with intravenous carboplatin, as first-line treatment for epithelial ovarian cancer (defined as epithelial ovarian, primary peritoneal and fallopian tube cancer). SEARCH

methodsWe searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase databases for relevant studies up to 15 November 2021, using keywords and MeSH terms. We additionally handsearched conference libraries, online clinical trial databases and screened through lists of retrieved references. SELECTION CRITERIA: We Included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing weekly paclitaxel in combination with carboplatin versus tri-weekly paclitaxel in combination with carboplatin, for treatment of newly-diagnosed epithelial ovarian cancer. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used the hazard ratio (HR) to estimate the primary efficacy outcomes progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS). We used the risk ratio (RR) to estimate the primary toxicity outcome of severe neutropenia and secondary outcomes of quality of life (QoL) and treatment-related adverse events. Two review authors independently selected studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias, using standard Cochrane methodological procedures. We included individual participant data (IPD) from one of the included studies, ICON-8, provided by the study team. We analysed data using a random-effects model in Review Manager 5.4 software. Additionally, we reconstructed IPD for PFS and OS data from published Kaplan-Meier curves from all studies and subsequently pooled these to analyse the two primary efficacy outcomes. MAIN

resultsFrom 2469 records, we identified four eligible RCTs with data for 3699 participants. All eligible studies were included in the main meta-analysis and reported on PFS and OS. There was likely a slight improvement in PFS when paclitaxel was dosed weekly compared to tri-weekly (HR 0.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.81 to 0.98; 4 studies, 3699 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). We found little to no improvement in OS when paclitaxel was dosed weekly compared to tri-weekly (HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.06; 4 studies, 3699 participants; high-certainty evidence). There was likely little to no difference in high-grade (grade 3 or 4) neutropenia when paclitaxel was dosed weekly compared to tri-weekly (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.43; 4 studies, 3639 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). However, weekly paclitaxel increased high-grade (grade 3 or 4) anaemia when compared to tri-weekly dosing (RR 1.57, 95% CI 1.12 to 2.20; 4 studies, 3639 participants; high-certainty evidence). There may be little to no difference in high-grade neuropathy when paclitaxel was dosed weekly compared to tri-weekly (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.94; 4 studies, 3639 participants; low-certainty evidence). The overall risk of detection bias and performance bias was low for OS, but was unclear for other outcomes, as treatments were not blinded. The risk of bias in other domains was low or unclear. We note that OS data were immature for three of the included studies (GOG-0262, ICON-8 and MITO-7). AUTHORS'

conclusionsWeekly paclitaxel combined with carboplatin for first-line treatment of epithelial ovarian cancer likely improves PFS slightly (moderate-certainty evidence) but not OS (high-certainty evidence), compared to tri-weekly paclitaxel combined with carboplatin. However, this was associated with increased risk for high-grade anaemia, treatment discontinuation, dose delays and dose omissions (high- to low-certainty evidence). Our findings may not apply to women receiving bevacizumab in first-line therapy, those receiving treatment in the neo-adjuvant setting, or those with rare subtypes of clear cell or mucinous ovarian cancer.

Indexed as

Ovarian NeoplasmsPaclitaxelBevacizumabCarboplatinCarcinoma, Ovarian EpithelialFemaleHumansBevacizumabCarboplatinPaclitaxel

Identifiers

PMID35188221
PMCPMC8859866
OpenAlexW4212810945

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.