ArticleTargeted oncology2024
Comparison of Adverse Events Between PARP Inhibitors in Patients with Epithelial Ovarian Cancer: A Nationwide Propensity Score Matched Cohort Study.
Article in Targeted oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDespite improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) with poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors (PARPi) as maintenance treatment for patients with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC), a comparative analysis of clinical events of interest (CEIs) of different PARPi is scarce.
objectiveThis study aimed to compare the safety of different PARPi in patients with EOC. PATIENTS AND
methodsThrough analyzing the Korean National Health Insurance Service from January 2009 to January 2022, this study involved BRCA-mutated, platinum-sensitive patients with EOC treated with olaparib (tablet), niraparib, and olaparib (capsule) as first-line or second-line maintenance treatment. CEIs were identified using International Statistical Classification of Diseases (ICD) 9/10 codes, with additional outcomes being dose modification and persistence.
resultsIn the first-line maintenance treatment [118 niraparib, 104 olaparib (tablet) patients], no significant differences were noted in CEIs, dose reduction, or 6-month discontinuation rate. For second-line maintenance treatment [303 niraparib, 126 olaparib (tablet), and 675 olaparib (capsule) patients], niraparib was associated with a higher risk of hematologic CEIs, particularly anemia, compared with olaparib (tablet) (0.51 [0.26-0.98] and 0.09 [0.01-0.74], respectively), and higher rate of discontinuation rate at 6 months. Of note, patients over 60 years old showed an increased risk of CEIs with niraparib, as indicated by the hazard ratio divergence in restricted cubic spline plots.
conclusionsNo differences were observed among the PARPi during first-line maintenance treatment. However, in the second-line maintenance treatment, significant differences were observed in the risk of experiencing CEIs, dose alteration possibilities, and discontinuation of PARPi between niraparib and olaparib (tablets). Moreover, our findings suggest that an age of 60 years may be a critical factor in selecting PARPi to reduce CEI incidence.
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.