Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 27, 2025
Competing-Risk Nomogram for Predicting Cancer-Specific Survival in Multiple Primary Colorectal Cancer Patients after Surgery
Published on: September 27, 2024
Association of Multiple High-Risk Factors on Observed Outcomes in Real-World Patients With Advanced Ovarian Cancer
Dana Chase1,2, Jessica Perhanidis3, Divya Gupta3,4
1Arizona Center for Cancer Care, Creighton University School of Medicine, Phoenix, AZ.
Purpose:
To identify risk factors for disease progression or death and assess outcomes by risk categories in real-world patients with advanced ovarian cancer.
Methods:
This retrospective study included adult patients from a nationwide electronic health record-derived deidentified database with stage III/IV ovarian cancer who received first-line therapy and had ≥12 weeks of follow-up after index date (end of first-line therapy). Factors predictive of time to next treatment and overall survival (OS) were assessed. Patients were grouped according to the cumulative number of high-risk factors present (stage IV disease, no debulking surgery or neoadjuvant therapy and interval debulking surgery, visible residual disease after surgery, and breast cancer gene [BRCA] wild-type disease/unknown BRCA status), and time to next treatment and OS were assessed.
Results:
Region of residence, disease stage, histology, BRCA status, surgery modality, and visible residual disease were significant predictors of time to next treatment; age, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, disease stage, BRCA status, surgery modality, visible residual disease, and platelet levels were significant predictors of OS (N = 1,920). Overall, 96.4%, 74.1%, and 40.3% of patients had at least 1, 2, or 3 high-risk factors, respectively; 15.7% of patients had all four high-risk factors. Observed median time to next treatment was 26.4 months (95% CI, 17.1 to 49.2) in patients with no high-risk factors and 4.6 months (95% CI, 4.1 to 5.7) in patients with four high-risk factors. Observed median OS was shorter among patients with more high-risk factors.
Conclusion:
These results underscore the complexity of risk assessment and demonstrate the importance of assessing a patient's cumulative risk profile rather than the impact of individual high-risk factors. They also highlight the potential for bias in cross-trial comparisons of median progression-free survival because of differences in risk-factor distribution among patient populations.
More Related Videos
09:40Author Spotlight: Unveiling the Role of TMOD3 in Platinum Resistance and Immune Infiltration in Ovarian Cancer
Published on: August 2, 2024
07:59Evaluating the Angiogenetic Properties of Ovarian Cancer Stem-Like Cells using the Three-Dimensional Co-Culture System, NICO-1
Published on: December 5, 2020
Related Concept Videos
02:56Treatment Resistant Cancers
01:21Cancer Survival Analysis
02:50Combination Therapies and Personalized Medicine
The combination of the drug acetazolamide and sulforaphane is a good example of combination therapy to treat cancer. The cells in the interior of a large tumor often die due to the hypoxic and...
01:23Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
02:57Targeted Cancer Therapies
There are several types of targeted therapies against...
02:49Cancer Therapies
However, cancer treatments can pose several challenges, as therapies used to kill cancer cells are generally also toxic to normal cells. Moreover, cancer cells mutate rapidly and can develop resistance to chemical agents or radiation therapy. Besides, all types of cancer cells may not respond to the same therapy. Some cancer cells respond to one...