SynthesisAnnals of surgical oncology2026
Efficacy of Poly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase Inhibitors According to Clinical Risk in Newly Diagnosed, Advanced Ovarian Cancer: A Meta-analysis of Phase III Clinical Trials.
Synthesis in Annals of surgical oncology, 2026. 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.
- Clinical Benefit of Pembrolizumab in Lynch Syndrome-Associated Advanced Ovarian Cancer With GermlineClinical case reports · 2026Article
- Are prioritizing and allocating expensive adjuvant and maintenance therapies beneficial in cancer care?Journal of the Chinese Medical Association : JCMA · 2026Article
- Progression-Free Survival with PARP Inhibitors According to Clinical Risk in Patients with Ovarian Cancer: An Indirect Comparison Using Reconstructed Data.Oncology research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPoly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor maintenance therapy improves progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with advanced ovarian cancer, with greatest benefit observed in patients with BRCA alterations and homologous recombination deficiencies (HRD). This study evaluated PFS benefit of PARP inhibitors according to clinically relevant risk factors. PATIENTS AND
methodsA literature search was performed including Cochrane, Medline, Pubmed, Pubmed Central, clinicaltrials.gov, and Embase from January 2018 to January 2025. This was performed using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Data was extracted and random effect models constructed using Review Manager (RevMan Version 7.2.0 The Cochrane Collaboration). Outcomes were reported as pooled hazard ratios (pHR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Clinically relevant subgroups were analyzed.
resultsA total of 6 studies comprising 3609 patients were selected for analysis. PARP inhibitors were beneficial regardless of patient age, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) score, disease stage, timing of surgery, chemotherapy response, or high-risk classification. Patients with visible residual disease (VRD) after primary cytoreductive surgery (pCRS) derived significant benefit (pHR 0.61, 95% CI 0.48-0.77, p-value < 0.001). In contrast, no significant PFS benefit was observed for patients with VRD after interval cytoreductive surgery (iCRS) (pHR 0.63, 95% CI 0.36-1.09, p-value = 0.10).
conclusionsAlthough PARP inhibitors benefit various patient subgroups, our analysis did not demonstrate a PFS benefit in patients with VRD following iCRS. Residual disease status appears to be prognostically important for patients undergoing iCRS with maintenance PARP inhibitors. Further analyses of clinical risk factors stratified according to genetic subgroup is required.
trial registrationProspero 2025 CRD420251007940, available at: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420251007940.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41042468What 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.