ArticleActa obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica2022
Investigating the effect of optimal cytoreduction in the context of platinum sensitivity in high-grade serous ovarian cancer.
Article in Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Predicting platinum-resistance in advanced ovarian cancer: defining patient and disease characteristics to improve treatment approaches at initiation of treatment or earlier in the course of the disease.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Investigating the effect of optimal cytoreduction in the context of platinum sensitivity in high-grade serous ovarian cancer.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2022Article
- Integrated Clinical and Genomic Models to Predict Optimal Cytoreduction in High-Grade Serous Ovarian Cancer.Cancers · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe survival benefits of surgical cytoreduction in ovarian cancer are well-established. However, the surgical outcome has never been assessed while controlling for the efficacy of chemotherapy. This leaves the possibility that cytoreduction may not be beneficial for patients whose cancer does not respond well to adjuvant treatment. We sought to answer whether surgical cytoreduction independently improves overall survival when controlling for chemotherapy outcome. MATERIAL AND
methodsWe performed a retrospective case-control study using our institution's ovarian cancer database to evaluate the effect of optimal cytoreduction on advanced stage, high-grade serous ovarian cancer. Patients' characteristics were compared using both univariate and multivariate regression modeling to assess for independent predictors of overall survival.
resultsA total of 470 patients were assessed for inclusion; 234 responders to chemotherapy and 98 nonresponders. Significant survival characteristics were identified and included in the multivariate analysis. Independent predictors of survival in the multivariate analysis were age, responder status, optimal cytoreduction, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and number of chemotherapy cycles. Kaplan-Meier survival curves showed improved survival for both patients who responded to chemotherapy and for those undergoing optimal cytoreduction (p < 0.001). We also demonstrated improved survival for patients receiving optimal cytoreduction among both nonresponders and responders (p < 0.001).
conclusionsOur analysis shows that patients who undergo optimal cytoreduction have an overall survival benefit regardless of their response to chemotherapy. Therefore, cytoreduction should be considered in all patients, even in those with advanced disease, if an optimal result can be achieved. This study was underpowered to assess patients who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy as a separate subgroup, but the order of treatment was controlled for in the overall analysis.
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.