Observational studyOncology research2025
Significance of CA125 Monitoring during Maintenance Treatment with Poly(ADP-Ribose) Polymerase Inhibitor in Ovarian Cancer after First-Line Chemotherapy: Multicenter, Observational Study.
Observational study in Oncology research, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Monitoring of Cancer Antigen 125 (CA125) during ovarian cancer (OC) maintenance treatment with poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPis) may be insufficient when using Gynecologic Cancer Intergroup (GCIG) biochemical progression criteria. This study aimed to evaluate the usefulness of CA125 monitoring in detecting OC recurrence during PARPis maintenance treatment. Methods: This multicenter retrospective cohort study included patients with primary OC who achieved complete or partial response after first-line platinum-based chemotherapy followed by PARPis maintenance treatment. Progression was defined using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) and GCIG biochemical criteria. New biochemical progression definitions, based on CA125 nadir determined using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, were proposed. Concordance between radiological and biochemical progression was assessed. Results: Of 142 patients, progression was detected in 54 (38.03%) and 29 (20.42%) using RECIST and GCIG criteria, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of the GCIG criteria were 53.70% [95% confidence interval (CI): 39.61%-67.38%], 100.00% [95% CI:95.91%-100.00%], 100.00% [95%CI: 88.10%-100.00%] and 77.88% [95% CI: 72.54%-82.43%], respectively. A cut-off of 1.59× nadir achieved 88.90% sensitivity and 87.20% specificity [Area Under Curve (AUC): 91.10%, 95% CI: 84.70%-97.40%] with a false positive rate (FPR) of 12.67%. Defining biochemical progression as an increase in CA125 of ≥3× nadir achieved sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and FPR of 79.63% [95% CI: 66.47%-89.37%], 98.86% [95% CI: 93.83%-99.97%], 97.73% [95% CI: 85.91%-99.67%], 88.78% [95% CI: 82.35%-93.06%], and 1.14%, respectively. Diagnostic accuracy was higher using the ≥3× nadir criterion compared with GCIG definition (91.55% vs. 82.39%). Conclusion: GCIG biochemical progression criteria during PARPis maintenance treatment after first-line chemotherapy missed 46.3% of progressing patients. A new criterion-CA125 ≥3× nadir-improves sensitivity and NPV, while maintaining high specificity, offering a simple and practical approach for clinical implementation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.