ArticleBMC cancer2025
Characteristics and potential predictors of prematurely terminated interventional clinical trials for ovarian cancer in the ClinicalTrials.gov database.
Article in BMC cancer, 2025. 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.
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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundGiven the high heterogeneity and low therapeutic responsiveness of ovarian cancer, there are unique challenges and barriers to successfully completing clinical trials. However, little is known about the status of trial completion and termination in this field. This study aimed to evaluate the landscape of completed and prematurely terminated trials in ovarian cancer and to assess the reasons and potential predictors associated with termination.
methodsWe conducted a cross-sectional analysis of interventional clinical trials for ovarian cancer registered on ClinicalTrials.gov between 2003 and 2022. Characteristics were compared between terminated and completed trials using χ2 or Fisher’s exact tests. The associations with termination were determined using logistic regression, with model performance assessed through a receiver operating characteristic curve and the Hosmer–Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test.
resultsA total of 1420 interventional clinical trials for ovarian cancer were included, of which 294 (20.70%) were prematurely terminated. Terminations were more frequent in drug/biological (89.46%), phase 2 (57.14%), parallel (34.01%), and single-center (41.84%) trials and had a larger median planned sample size (median 56, IQR 36–100). A small portion of trials were terminated due to futility of efficacy (19.39%) and safety issues (6.80%). Conduct- or logistical-related reasons accounted for 58.50% of the terminations, and the reasons for 15.31% were unknown. A multivariable analysis identified that phase 2 (OR 1.50, 95% CI 1.04–2.14), a parallel design (OR 2.14, 95% CI 1.31–3.51), and a larger planned sample size (versus Q1: Q2: OR 1.78, 95% CI 1.11–2.84; Q3: OR 2.22, 95% CI 1.38–3.57; Q4: OR 2.19, 95% CI 1.24–3.87) increased the risk of premature termination. Meanwhile, multicenter trials reduced the risk (OR 0.31, 95% CI 0.21–0.47).
conclusionsThe termination rate of interventional clinical trials for ovarian cancer was high, mainly due to conduct-related or logistical issues rather than efficacy or safety concerns. The planned sample size, trial phase, number of centers and interventional group design were associated with termination. The reasons and predictors for termination should be considered during trial design and planning according to the type of cancer, thereby increasing the likelihood of trial completion and facilitating the best available care for patients.
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.