Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38679485›Full record

ArticleChinese medical journal2025

Olaparib and niraparib as maintenance therapy in patients with newly diagnosed and platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer: A single-center study in China.

Dengfeng Wang, Xunwei Shi, Jiao Pei, Can Zhang, Liping Peng, Jie Zhang, Jing Zheng, Chunrong Peng, Xiaoqiao Huang, Xiaoshi Liu and 2 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Chinese medical journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

12 authors.

Dengfeng WangDepartment of Gynecologic Oncology, Sichuan Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, Affiliated Cancer Hospital of University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, Sichuan 610041, China.
Xunwei ShiDepartment of Gynecologic Oncology, Sichuan Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, Affiliated Cancer Hospital of University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, Sichuan 610041, China.
Jiao PeiDepartment of Clinical Research, Sichuan Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, Affiliated Cancer Hospital of University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, Sichuan 610041, China.
Can ZhangDepartment of Gynecologic Oncology, Sichuan Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, Affiliated Cancer Hospital of University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, Sichuan 610041, China.
Liping PengDepartment of Gynecologic Oncology, Sichuan Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, Affiliated Cancer Hospital of University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, Sichuan 610041, China.
Jie ZhangDepartment of Gynecologic Oncology, Sichuan Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, Affiliated Cancer Hospital of University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, Sichuan 610041, China.
Jing ZhengDepartment of Gynecologic Oncology, Sichuan Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, Affiliated Cancer Hospital of University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, Sichuan 610041, China.
Chunrong PengDepartment of Gynecologic Oncology, Sichuan Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, Affiliated Cancer Hospital of University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, Sichuan 610041, China.
Xiaoqiao HuangDepartment of Gynecologic Oncology, Sichuan Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, Affiliated Cancer Hospital of University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, Sichuan 610041, China.
Xiaoshi LiuDepartment of Gynecologic Oncology, Sichuan Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, Affiliated Cancer Hospital of University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, Sichuan 610041, China.
Hong LiuDepartment of Gynecologic Oncology, Sichuan Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, Affiliated Cancer Hospital of University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, Sichuan 610041, China.
Guonan ZhangDepartment of Gynecologic Oncology, Sichuan Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, Affiliated Cancer Hospital of University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, Sichuan 610041, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPoly adenosine-diphosphate-ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors (PARPi) have been approved to act as first-line maintenance (FL-M) therapy and as platinum-sensitive recurrent maintenance (PSR-M) therapy for ovarian cancer in China for >5 years. Herein, we have analyzed the clinical-application characteristics of olaparib and niraparib in ovarian cancer-maintenance therapy in a real-world setting to strengthen our understanding and promote their rational usage.

methodsA retrospective chart review identified patients with newly diagnosed or platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer, who received olaparib or niraparib as maintenance therapy at Sichuan Cancer Hospital between August 1, 2018, and December 31, 2021. Patient medical records were reviewed. We grouped and analyzed patients based on the type of PARPi they used (the olaparib group and the niraparib group) and the line of PARPi maintenance therapy (the FL-M setting and the PSR-M setting). The primary endpoint was the 24-month progression-free survival (PFS) rate.

resultsIn total, 131 patients (olaparib: n = 67, 51.1%; niraparib: n = 64, 48.9%) were enrolled. Breast cancer susceptibility genes ( BRCA ) mutations ( BRCA m) were significantly less common in the niraparib group than in the olaparib group [9.4% (6/64) vs . 62.7% (42/67), P <0.001], especially in the FL-M setting [10.4% (5/48) vs . 91.4% (32/35), P <0.001]. The 24-month progression-free survival (PFS) rates in the FL-M and PSR-M settings were 60.4% and 45.7%, respectively. In patients with BRCA m, the 24-month PFS rates in the FL-M and PSR-M settings were 62.2% and 72.7%, respectively.

conclusionsOlaparib and niraparib were effective in patients with ovarian cancer without any new safety signals except for skin pigmentation. In patients with BRCA m, the 24-month PFS of the PARPi used in the PSR-M setting was even higher than that used in the FL-M setting.

Indexed as

IndazolesOvarian NeoplasmsPhthalazinesPiperazinesPiperidinesPoly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase InhibitorsAdultAgedChinaFemaleHumansMiddle AgedNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalProgression-Free SurvivalRetrospective StudiesIndazolesniraparibolaparibPhthalazinesPiperazinesPiperidinesPoly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase InhibitorsFirst-line maintenance therapyOvarian cancerPARP inhibitorPFSPlatinum-sensitive recurrent maintenance therapyReal-world study

Identifiers

PMID38679485
PMCPMC12091628

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.