Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40205480›Full record

SynthesisWorld journal of surgical oncology2025

Comparative effectiveness and safety of treatment regimens for recurrent advanced ovarian cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Xingfa Huo, Tian Tian, Xiaochun Zhang, Na Zhou

Abstract readComparative StudyNetwork Meta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in World journal of surgical oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
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

4 authors.

Xingfa HuoPrecision Medicine Center of Oncology, The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Qingdao University, No. 59 Haier Road, Qingdao, Shandong, China.
Tian TianDepartment of Gynecology, the Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, No. 59 Haier Road, Qingdao, Shandong, China.
Xiaochun ZhangPrecision Medicine Center of Oncology, The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Qingdao University, No. 59 Haier Road, Qingdao, Shandong, China.
Na ZhouPrecision Medicine Center of Oncology, The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Qingdao University, No. 59 Haier Road, Qingdao, Shandong, China. zhouna@qdu.edu.cn.

Funding

National Natural Science Foundation of China 82272693
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe choice of treatment options for recurrent advanced ovarian cancer is very important. However, the most effective treatment options remain unclear.

methodsWe searched the PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases and the proceedings of the last 5 years of several meetings on ovarian cancer according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of recurrent treatment for advanced ovarian cancer with progression-free survival (PFS) were reticulated network meta-analyzed. RCTs were also analyzed for Grades 3 or higher drug-associated adverse events.

resultsWe included 24 RCTs involving 6,250 patients with advanced recurrent ovarian cancer and a total of 10 treatment regimens. Our network meta-analysis revealed that the PARP plus anti-angiogenic regimen (Surface Under the Cumulative Ranking Curve, SUCRA 95.26%) outperformed eight other regimens and demonstrated a significant improvement in patient survival. The double immunotherapy plus chemotherapy regimen (SUCRA: 87.24%) showed strong efficacy. Additionally, the anti-angiogenic plus chemotherapy regimens (SUCRA: 60.14%), single anti-angiogenic regimens (SUCRA: 52.3%), and poly ADP-ribose polymerase regimens (SUCRA: 61.82%) demonstrated similar efficacy. Interestingly, immunotherapy plus chemotherapy regimens (SUCRA: 31.61%) showed a significant improvement compared to chemotherapy regimens, and double immunotherapy regimens (SUCRA: 36.49%) also demonstrated strong efficacy. However, single immunotherapy regimens (SUCRA: 8.53%) demonstrated limited efficacy. Finally, we found that the incidence of grade 3 or higher adverse reactions was low and manageable for all treatment options.

conclusionThis meta-analysis showed that the PARP plus anti-angiogenic regimen is superior to the other nine regimens in treating patients with advanced recurrent ovarian cancer and can significantly improve their survival. Our results show that the anti-angiogenic plus CT, single-agent anti-angiogenic, and single-agent PARP regimens have similar efficacies; therefore, clinical treatment plans can be adjusted based on the differences in side effects among the three regimens. The double immunotherapy regimen demonstrated superior efficacy compared to the single immunotherapy regimen, particularly in terms of patient survival. These results may offer new therapeutic options for patients with advanced recurrent ovarian cancer, particularly through the use of immunotherapy.

trial registrationPROSPERO (ID CRD420251007476) https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420251007476 .

Indexed as

Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalOvarian NeoplasmsAngiogenesis InhibitorsFemaleHumansPoly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase InhibitorsPrognosisRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSurvival RateAngiogenesis InhibitorsPoly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase InhibitorsAdvanced recurrentNetwork meta-analysisOvarian cancerTreatment regimens

Identifiers

PMID40205480
PMCPMC11983808

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.