Skip to main content

Table 1 Patient demographic and clinical characteristics

From: A new promising way of maintenance therapy in advanced ovarian cancer: a comparative clinical study

Characteristic

Arm 1

(n = 46)

Arm 2

(n = 76)

Arm 3

(n = 42)

Arm 4

(n = 40)

Arm 5

(n = 80)

Age, years

 Median

54.0

54.0

54.5

54.2

54.1

 Range

40–76

43–71

41–68

47–68

39–69

Ethnicity, No. (%)

 White

42 (91.3)

68 (89.5)

38 (90.5)

36 (90)

73 (91.2)

 Asian

4 (8.7)

7 (9.2)

4 (9.5)

3 (7.5)

6 (7.5)

 Black

0 (0)

0 (0)

0 (0)

0 (0)

0 (0)

 Other

0 (0)

1 (1.3)

0 (0)

1 (2.5)

1 (1.2)

FIGO stage at screening, No. (%)

 III

38 (82.6)

60 (78.9)

34 (80.9)

32 (80.0)

66 (82.5)

 IV

8 (17.4)

16 (21.1)

8 (19.0)

8 (20.0)

14 (17.5)

PCI

 Median

24

27

27

27

29

 Range

9–36

8–37

7–37

7–37

7–37

  7–10 (≤ 10), No. (%)

2 (4.3)

4 (5.3)

4 (9.5)

2 (5.0)

2 (2.5)

  11–20

12 (26.1)

20 (26.3)

8 (19.0)

8 (20.0)

20 (25.0)

  21–30

23 (50.0)

26 (34.2)

14 (33.3)

17 (42.5)

26 (32.5)

  31–37

9 (19.6)

26 (34.2)

16 (38.1)

13 (32.5)

32 (40.0)

ECOG performance status at screening, No. (%)

 0

40 (87.0)

67 (88.2)

37 (88.1)

34 (85.0)

69 (86.3)

 1

3 (6.5)

5 (6.6)

3 (7.1)

4 (10.0)

6 (7.5)

 2

3 (6.5)

4 (5.3)

2 (4.8)

2 (5.0)

5 (6.3)

 pa

0.96

0.84

0.86

0.93

 

Rate of patients with ascites

 at screeningb, No. (%)

31 (67.4)

51 (67.1)

29 (69.0)

28 (70.0)

55 (68.8)

  95% CI

52–80

55–68

53–82

54–83

57–79

  pb

0.87

0.82

0.97

0.89

 

Standard chemotherapy regimen, No. (%)

 ТР

26 (57)

40 (53)

20 (48)

18 (45)

37 (46)

 ТС

20 (43)

36 (47)

22 (52)

22 (55)

43 (54)

CA-125 level, U/mL

 at screening

  Mean

579.78

584.32

581.85

581.98

583.75

  Range

110- > 600

115- > 600

120- > 600

110- > 600

105- > 600

 at presurgery

  Mean ± SDc

31.50 ± 5.19

37.91 ± 21.43

42.26 ± 24.50

581.98 ± 85.07

68.70 ± 16.23

  Range

25–45

30–210

30–190

69- > 600

35–110

 after combined treatment

  Mean ± SDc

12.78 ± 2.78

10.42 ± 4.07

12.67 ± 5.48

31.05 ± 8.70

32.44 ± 6.23

  Range

10–20

8–42

8–35

20–54

20–55

Primary debulking surgery at combined treatmentd, No. (%)

 Complete cytoreduction (no visible tumor foci)

39 (84.8)

63 (82.9)

34 (81.0)

5 (12.5)

20 (25.0)

 Optimal cytoreduction (≤ 1 cm)

7 (15.2)

13 (17.1)

8 (19.0)

21 (52.5)

51 (63.8)

 Suboptimal cytoreduction (> 1 cm)

0 (0)

0 (0)

0 (0)

14 (35.0)

9 (11.3)

Disease progression (tumor recurrence rate) after combined treatment within five years of follow-up, No. (%)

38 (82.6)

61 (80.3)

33 (78.6)

38 (95.0)

78 (97.5)

Rate of patients without recurrent ovarian cancer within five years of follow-up, No. (%)

8 (17.4)

15 (19.7)

9 (21.4)

2 (5.0)

2 (2.5)

  1. FIGO International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics, PCI peritoneal cancer index, ECOG Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group, 95% CI 95% confidence interval, SD standard deviation
  2. aMann-Whitney U-test was applied to determine the differences between arms 1–4 vs arm 5
  3. bChi-square criterion was applied to determine the differences between arms 1–4 vs arm 5
  4. cStudent’s test was applied to determine mean level, standard deviation, and the differences between arms 1–3 vs arm 5
  5. All differences between arms 1–3 vs arm 5 were statistically significant (p <  0.0001)
  6. dMann-Whitney U-test was applied to compare the degree of surgery used in arms 1–3 vs arm 5. Degrees of surgery were scored as follows: macroscopic completed resection (no visible tumor foci) – 0, optimal debulking (≤ 1 cm) – 1, suboptimal debulking (> 1 сm) – 2. All differences between arms 1–3 vs arm 5 were statistically significant (p <  0.0001)
Back to article page

BMC Cancer

ISSN: 1471-2407

Contact us