IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0081858.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Phase III Trials of Standard Chemotherapy with or without Bevacizumab for Ovarian Cancer: A Meta-Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Mingyi Zhou
  • Ping Yu
  • Xiujuan Qu
  • Yunpeng Liu
  • Jingdong Zhang

Abstract

Background: Platinum-based standard chemotherapy improves survival of ovarian cancer (OC), but the five-year survival rate remains below 50%. Antiangiogenic agents (7.5 or 15 mg/kg Bevacizumab, Bev) plus to standard chemotherapy improve progression-free survival (PFS) not overall survival (OS) in completed randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The efficacy and safety of two doses of Bev + standard chemotherapy remain controversial. Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane databases and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched. The outcomes of eligible RCTs included PFS, OS and toxicities. Hazard ratio (HR) and relative risk (RR) were used for the meta-analysis and were expressed with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results: Bev + chemotherapy improved PFS (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.75 to 0.89; P = .000) and OS (HR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.77 to 0.99; P = .026) in newly diagnosed OC (2 trials, 2776 patients), and PFS (HR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.41 to 0.57; P = .000) in recurrent OC (2 trials, 845 patients). Bev + chemotherapy increased non-CNS bleeding (RR, 3.63; 95% CI, 1.81 to 7.29; P = .000), hypertension grade ≥ 2 (RR, 4.90; 95% CI, 3.83 to 6.25; P = .000), arterial thromboembolism (RR, 2.29; 95% CI, 1.33 to 3.94; P = .003), gastrointestinal perforation (RR, 2.90; 95% CI, 1.44 to 5.82; P = .003), and proteinuria grade ≥ 3 (RR, 6.63; 95% CI 3.17 to 13.88; P = .000). No difference was observed between the two Bev doses in PFS (HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.88 to 1.24) or OS (HR, 1.15, 95% CI, 0.88 to 1.50), but 15 mg/kg Bev increased toxicities. Conclusion: Bev + standard chemotherapy delayed progression for newly diagnosed and recurrent OC, and improved survival for newly diagnosed OC. The 7.5 mg/kg dose appeared to be optimal for newly diagnosed OC patients with high risk for progression.

Suggested Citation

  • Mingyi Zhou & Ping Yu & Xiujuan Qu & Yunpeng Liu & Jingdong Zhang, 2013. "Phase III Trials of Standard Chemotherapy with or without Bevacizumab for Ovarian Cancer: A Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(12), pages 1-1, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0081858
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0081858
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0081858
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0081858&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0081858?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Xinyu Qian & Jing Qin & Songdan Pan & Xin Li & Yuelong Pan & Shenglin Ma, 2015. "Maintenance Therapy in Ovarian Cancer with Targeted Agents Improves PFS and OS: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(9), pages 1-13, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0081858. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.