Phase III Gynecologic Oncology Group Study of Advanced Ovarian Cancer: Bevacizumab Added to Initial Chemotherapy Extends Progression-Free Survival

2010 ◽  
Vol 32 (Sup 1) ◽  
pp. 17
Author(s):  
&NA;
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Gynecologic Oncology ◽  
Advanced Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Gynecologic Oncology Group ◽  
Oncology Group ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Oncology Group Study

scholarly journals Bevacizumab use in the frontline, maintenance and recurrent settings for ovarian cancer

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (7) ◽  
pp. 225-246 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carolyn E Haunschild ◽  
Krishnansu S Tewari
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Gynecologic Oncology ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Gynecologic Oncology Group ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Platinum Sensitive ◽  
The Us ◽  
Us Fda

On 13 June 2018, Genentech, Inc. issued a press release announcing that the US FDA had approved the antiangiogenesis drug, bevacizumab, in combination with chemotherapy for frontline and maintenance therapy for women with newly diagnosed ovarian cancer. Regulatory approval was based on the National Cancer Institute-sponsored Gynecologic Oncology Group (GOG) protocol 0218, the Phase III, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, multi-center and multi-national clinical trial that met its primary end point, progression-free survival. Bevacizumab is now approved in the frontline, platinum-sensitive recurrent and platinum-resistant recurrent settings for epithelial ovarian cancer. This review will address the broad range of clinical trials addressing the efficacy of bevacizumab use in ovarian cancer.

Principles and practice of intraperitoneal chemotherapy for ovarian cancer

2007 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-20 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. Fujiwara ◽  
D. Armstrong ◽  
M. Morgan ◽  
M. Markman
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Survival Benefit ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Gynecologic Oncology ◽  
Advanced Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Clinical Aspects ◽  
Gynecologic Oncology Group ◽  
Oncology Group ◽  
Phase Iii Trials

Intraperitoneal (IP) chemotherapy has been studied for years to improve the survival of patients with ovarian cancer. Recently, the result of Gynecologic Oncology Group 172 trial comparing IP versus intravenous administration of cisplatin-based chemotherapy was published, demonstrating the improvement of survival benefit in favor of the IP arm. This trial is the third trial that showed a survival benefit on IP chemotherapy. The National Cancer Institute (NCI) and Gynecologic Oncology Group have done a meta-analysis on the results of these three US trials and other phase III trials of IP versus intravenous chemotherapy, and significant improvement of survival was shown with IP therapy. Based on this meta-analysis, NCI has released a clinical announcement encouraging the gynecological oncology community to consider IP chemotherapy as the standard treatment for optimally debulked advanced ovarian cancer patients. However, there still are controversial issues regarding the use of IP chemotherapy. It is important to understand how IP chemotherapy works to solve those issues in the future. In this review article, we discuss the principles and clinical aspects of IP chemotherapy and also discuss the current problems and future perspectives in IP chemotherapy

scholarly journals Counterpoint: Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy: An Investigational Treatment in Ovarian Cancer

2004 ◽  
Vol 2 (6) ◽  
pp. 555-560 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert F. Ozols
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Standard Therapy ◽  
Gynecologic Oncology ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Systemic Circulation ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Gynecologic Oncology Group ◽  
Oncology Group ◽  
Phase Ii Trials

Intraperitoneal (IP) chemotherapy in ovarian cancer has been studied since 1978. Numerous phase II trials have been performed, which have shown that higher levels can be obtained in the peritoneal cavity compared with systemic circulation after administration of cytoxic agents in a large volume via a semi-permanent catheter. Three randomized trials have been performed in patients with ovarian cancer comparing different IP regimens to standard therapy with intravenous agents. The last two trials from the Gynecologic Oncology Group (GOG) and the Southwest Oncology Group (SWOG) compared two different IP regimens versus standard therapy with intravenous cisplatin plus paclitaxel. Although an improvement in progression-free survival was reported for the IP regimens, they have been associated with unacceptable toxicity, and no IP regimen can be considered standard therapy. Maintenance therapy with IP cisplatin also failed to improve survival in patients who obtained complete remission after intravenous chemotherapy. The GOG is considering another phase III trial of IP therapy that will compare a carboplatin-based regimen versus standard therapy with intravenous paclitaxel plus carboplatin. Unless such a trial shows an improvement in clinical outcome, intravenous carboplatin plus paclitaxel remains the standard of care and IP chemotherapy should not be used outside of a clinical trial.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document