ReviewCancers2022
Feasibility Study of a Network Meta-Analysis and Unanchored Population-Adjusted Indirect Treatment Comparison of Niraparib, Olaparib, and Bevacizumab as Maintenance Therapies in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Advanced Ovarian Cancer.
Review in Cancers, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02655016 (A Phase 3, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Multicenter Study of Niraparib Maintenance Treatment in Patients With Advanced Ovarian Cancer Following Response on Front-Line Platinum-Based Chemotherapy), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
A Phase 3, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Multicenter Study of Niraparib Maintenance Treatment in Patients With Advanced Ovarian Cancer Following Response on Front-Line Platinum-Based Chemotherapy
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy and safety of PARP inhibitor maintenance therapy for ovarian cancer: a meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of randomized controlled trials.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2024Pooled it
- Update Gynecologic Malignancies 2025 - Expert Opinion on Systemic Therapy for Early and Advanced Gynecological Cancers.Geburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde · 2025Article
- Real-world Study on the Effect of PARPi as Maintenance Therapy on Platinum Sensitivity after First- and Second-line Chemotherapy in Patients with Recurrent High-grade Serous Epithelial Ovarian Cancer.Current cancer drug targets · 2024Article
- Real-world TRAE association between niraparib and platinum-based chemotherapy.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Article
- Peritoneal Metastases: Evolution from a Dark Horizon to an Encouraging Present and a Promising Future.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- PARP Inhibitor Inhibits the Vasculogenic Mimicry through a NF-κB-PTX3 Axis Signaling in Breast Cancer Cells.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Article
- Population-adjusted indirect treatment comparison of maintenance PARP inhibitor with or without bevacizumabTherapeutic advances in medical oncology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Selecting a first-line (1L) maintenance option for ovarian cancer is challenging given the variety of therapies, differing trials, and the lack of head-to-head data for angiogenesis and poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors. Thus, indirect treatment comparisons (ITCs) can aid treatment decision making. This study assessed the feasibility of two ITCs, a network meta-analysis (NMA) and a population-adjusted ITC (PAIC), comparing the efficacy of the PARP inhibitor niraparib in the PRIMA trial (NCT02655016) with other 1L maintenance treatments. A systematic literature review was conducted to identify trials using the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions to assess differences in trial design, population characteristics, treatment arms, and outcome measures. All 12 trials identified were excluded from the NMA due to the absence of a common comparator and differences in survival measures and/or inclusion criteria. The PAIC comparing PRIMA and PAOLA-1 trials was also not feasible due to differences in inclusion criteria, survival measures, and the previous receipt of chemotherapy/bevacizumab. Neither ITC met recommended guidelines for analysis; the results of such comparisons would not be considered appropriate evidence when selecting 1L maintenance options in ovarian cancer. ITCs in this setting should be performed cautiously, as many factors can preclude objective trial comparisons.
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.