Trial reportInternational journal of clinical oncology2023
Veliparib with frontline chemotherapy and as maintenance in Japanese women with ovarian cancer: a subanalysis of efficacy, safety, and antiemetic use in the phase 3 VELIA trial.
Trial report in International journal of clinical oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Safety and tolerability of PARP inhibitors in cancer patients: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.BMC cancer · 2026Pooled it
- Efficacy and safety of PARP inhibitors in older patients with advanced ovarian cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Pooled it
- Enhancing PARP inhibitor efficacy in ovarian cancer: targeting the PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway.Journal of ovarian research · 2025Review
- Predictive biomarkers for the efficacy of PARP inhibitors in ovarian cancer: an updated systematic review.BJC reports · 2025Article
- Targeting regulated cell death pathways in cancers for effective treatment: a comprehensive review.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2024Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
21 authors at 19 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe phase 3 VELIA trial evaluated veliparib with carboplatin/paclitaxel and as maintenance in patients with high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma.
methodsPatients with previously untreated stage III-IV high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma were randomized 1:1:1 to control (placebo with carboplatin/paclitaxel and placebo maintenance), veliparib-combination-only (veliparib with carboplatin/paclitaxel and placebo maintenance), or veliparib-throughout (veliparib with carboplatin/paclitaxel and veliparib maintenance). Randomization stratification factors included geographic region (Japan versus North America or rest of the world). Primary end point was investigator-assessed median progression-free survival. Efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetics were evaluated in a subgroup of Japanese patients.
resultsSeventy-eight Japanese patients were randomized to control (n = 23), veliparib-combination-only (n = 30), and veliparib-throughout (n = 25) arms. In the Japanese subgroup, median progression-free survival for veliparib-throughout versus control was 27.4 and 19.1 months (hazard ratio, 0.46; 95% confidence interval, 0.18-1.16; p = 0.1 [not significant]). In the veliparib-throughout arm, grade 3/4 leukopenia, neutropenia, and thrombocytopenia rates were higher for Japanese (32%/88%/32%) versus non-Japanese (17%/56%/28%) patients. Grade 3/4 anemia rates were higher in non-Japanese (65%) versus Japanese (48%) patients. Early introduction of olanzapine during veliparib monotherapy maintenance phase may help prevent premature discontinuation of veliparib, via its potent antiemetic efficacy.
conclusionsMedian progression-free survival was numerically longer in Japanese patients in the veliparib-throughout versus control arm, consistent with results in the overall study population. Pharmacokinetics were comparable between Japanese and non-Japanese patients. Data for the subgroup of Japanese patients were not powered to show statistical significance but to guide further investigation.
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.