Cited by 17Ovarian cancer diagnosis and treatmentCancer Risks and FactorsInflammatory Biomarkers in Disease Prognosis

Correlation of Imaging and Plasma Based Biomarkers to Predict Response to Bevacizumab in Epithelial Ovarian Cancer (EOC)

Open access
Buechel, Megan E., Enserro, Danielle, Burger, Robert A., Brady, Mark F., Wade, Katrina, Secord, Angeles Alvarez, Nixon, Andrew B., Mirniaharikandehei, Seyedehnafiseh +8 more·2021·Gynecologic Oncology

Abstract

Purpose Increasing measures of adiposity have been correlated with poor oncologic outcomes and a lack of response to anti-angiogenic therapies. Limited data exists on the impact of subcutaneous fat density (SFD) and visceral fat density (VFD) on oncologic outcomes. This ancillary analysis of GOG-218, evaluates whether imaging markers of adiposity were predictive biomarkers for bevacizumab (bev) use in epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC).Patients and methods There were 1249 patients (67%) from GOG-218 with imaging measurements. SFD and VFD were calculated utilizing Hounsfield units (HU). Proportional hazards models were used to assess the association between SFD and VFD with overall survival (OS).Results Increased SFD and VFD showed an increased HR for death (HR per 1-SD increase 1.12, 95% CI:1.05-1.19 p = 0.0009 and 1.13, 95% CI: 1.05-1.20 p = 0.0006 respectively). In the predictive analysis for response to bev, high VFD showed an increased hazard for death in the placebo group (HR per 1-SD increase 1.22, 95% CI: 1.09-1.37; p = 0.025). However, in the bev group there was no effect seen (HR per 1-SD increase: 1.01, 95% CI: 0.90-1.14) Median OS was 45 vs 47 months in the VFD low groups and 36 vs 42 months in the VFD high groups on placebo versus bev, respectively.Conclusion High VFD and SFD have a negative prognostic impact on patients with EOC. High VFD appears to be a predictive marker of bev response and patients with high VFD may be more likely to benefit from initial treatment with bev.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ygyno.2021.02.032

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Unlike for PARP inhibitors, there are no clinically approved biomarkers to predict responses of women with ovarian cancer to the anti-angiogenic bevacizumab.

    “Unlike for PARPis, there are no clinically approved biomarkers to predict responses of women with ovarian cancer to the anti-angiogenic bevacizumab, although numerous studies have focused on this area (Buechel et al., 2021; Gao et al., 2021; Hsu et al., 2021).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 30 · Cited by 17

Authors
Buechel, M. E., Enserro, D., Burger, R. A., Brady, M. F., Wade, K., Secord, A. A., Nixon, A. B., Mirniaharikandehei, S., Liu, H., Zheng, B., O'Malley, D. M., Gray, H., Tewari, K. S., Mannel, R. S., Birrer, M. J., & Moore, K. N.
Affiliations
  • OU Health Stephenson Cancer Center (US)
  • Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center (US)
  • University of Pennsylvania (US)
  • Ochsner Medical Center (US)
  • Duke University (US)
  • University of Oklahoma (US)
  • University of Washington (US)
  • University of California, Irvine (US)
  • University of Alabama at Birmingham (US)
Corresponding author
  • Buechel, Megan E.
  • Enserro, Danielle
  • Burger, Robert A.
  • Brady, Mark F.
  • Wade, Katrina
  • Secord, Angeles Alvarez
  • Nixon, Andrew B.
  • Mirniaharikandehei, Seyedehnafiseh
  • Liu, Hong
  • Zheng, Bin
  • Gray, Heidi
  • Tewari, Krishnansu S.
  • Mannel, Robert S.
  • Birrer, Michael J.
  • Moore, Kathleen N.
Venue
Gynecologic Oncology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2021-05
Volume
161
Issue
2
Pages
382-388
ISSN
0090-8258 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3135115077
Cited by
17
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1
FWCI
2.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Gynecologic Oncology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • National Cancer Institute
  • University of Oklahoma Stephenson Cancer Center
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Reproductive Medicine › Ovarian cancer diagnosis and treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer Risks and Factors
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Inflammatory Biomarkers in Disease Prognosis
Keywords
epithelial ovarian cancer, bevacizumab, adiposity, predictive biomarkers, overall survival, CT imaging biomarkers, Hounsfield units
MeSH terms
Bevacizumab, Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological, Carcinoma, Ovarian Epithelial, Adult, Aged, Double-Blind Method, Female, Humans, Middle Aged, Ovarian Neoplasms, Tomography, X-Ray Computed, Biomarkers, Tumor, Survival Analysis, Treatment Outcome, Subcutaneous Fat, Intra-Abdominal Fat, Adiposity

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review