Additional file 1 of PARP inhibitor era in ovarian cancer treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
Creators: name: Baradács, István
name: Teutsch, Brigitta
name: Váradi, Alex
name: Bilá, Alexandra
name: Vincze, Ádám
name: Hegyi, Péter
name: Fazekas, Tamás
name: Komoróczy, Balázs
name: Nyirády, Péter
name: Ács, Nándor
name: Bánhidy, Ferenc
name: Lintner, Balázs
Publisher: name: figshare
Year: 2024
Subjects: subject: Medicine
subject: Genetics
subject: FOS: Biological sciences
subject: Pharmacology
subject: Chemical Sciences not elsewhere classified
subject: Cancer
subject: Science Policy

description: Additional file 1: Table S1. PRISMA 2020 checklist. Table S2. Summary of findings &amp; quality of evidence – PFS in recurrent OC: PARPi maintenance vs. placebo. Table S3. Summary of findings &amp; quality of evidence – PFS in recurrent OC: PARPi monotherapy vs. chemotherapy. Table S4. Summary of findings &amp; quality of evidence – PFS in newly-diagnosed OC: PARPi maintenance vs. placebo. Table S5. Summary of findings &amp; quality of evidence – AEs in recurrent OC: PARPi maintenance vs. placebo. Table S6. Summary of findings &amp; quality of evidence – AEs in recurrent OC: PARPi monotherapy vs. chemotherapy. Table S7. Summary of findings &amp; quality of evidence – AEs in newly-diagnosed OC: PARPi maintenance vs. placebo. Appendix S1. The search terms applied in a systematic search. Figure S1. Forest plot representing that the PARPi maintenance therapy for recurrent ovarian cancer decrease the hazard ratio for disease progression or death versus placebo in the total population. Figure S2. Forest plot representing that the PARPi maintenance therapy for recurrent ovarian cancer decrease the hazard ratio for disease progression or death versus placebo in the BRCAm population. Figure S3. Forest plot representing that the PARPi maintenance therapy for recurrent ovarian cancer decrease the hazard ratio for disease progression or death versus placebo in the gBRCAm population. Figure S4. Forest plot representing that the PARPi maintenance therapy for recurrent ovarian cancer decrease the hazard ratio for disease progression or death versus placebo in the BRCAw population. Figure S5. Forest plot representing that the PARPi monotherapy for recurrent ovarian cancer decrease the hazard ratio for disease progression or death versus chemotherapy in the total population. Figure S6. Forest plot representing that the PARPi monotherapy for recurrent ovarian cancer decrease the hazard ratio for disease progression or death versus chemotherapy in the BRCAm population. Figure S7. Forest plot representing that the PARPi maintenance therapy for newly-diagnosed ovarian cancer decrease the hazard ratio for disease progression or death versus placebo in the total population. Figure S8. Forest plot representing that the PARPi maintenance therapy for newly-diagnosed ovarian cancer decrease the hazard ratio for disease progression or death versus placebo in the BRCAm population. Figure S9. Forest plot representing that the PARPi maintenance therapy for recurrent ovarian cancer has little to no effect on the risk of adverse events by any grade versus placebo. Figure S10. Forest plot representing that the PARPi maintenance therapy for recurrent ovarian cancer increase the risk of grade 3≤ adverse events versus placebo. Figure S11. Forest plot representing that the PARPi maintenance therapy for recurrent ovarian cancer increase the risk of serious adverse events versus placebo. Figure S12. Forest plot representing that the PARPi maintenance therapy for recurrent ovarian cancer increase the risk of anaemia by any grade versus placebo. Figure S13. Forest plot representing that the PARPi maintenance therapy for recurrent ovarian cancer increase the risk of grade 3≤ anaemia versus placebo. Figure S14. Forest plot representing that the PARPi maintenance therapy for recurrent ovarian cancer increase the risk of thrombocytopenia by any grade versus placebo. Figure S15. Forest plot representing that the PARPi maintenance therapy for recurrent ovarian cancer increase the risk of grade 3≤ thrombocytopenia versus placebo. Figure S16. Forest plot representing that the PARPi maintenance therapy for recurrent ovarian cancer has little to no effect on the risk of leukopenia by any grade versus placebo. Figure S17. Forest plot representing that the PARPi maintenance therapy for recurrent ovarian cancer increase the risk of grade 3≤ leukopenia versus placebo. Figure S18. Forest plot representing that the PARPi maintenance therapy for recurrent ovarian cancer increase the risk of neutropenia by any grade versus placebo. Figure S19. Forest plot representing that the PARPi maintenance therapy for recurrent ovarian cancer increase the risk of grade 3≤ neutropenia versus placebo. Figure S20. Forest plot representing that the PARPi maintenance therapy for recurrent ovarian cancer increase the risk of nausea by any grade versus placebo. Figure S21. Forest plot representing that the PARPi maintenance therapy for recurrent ovarian cancer increase the risk of grade 3≤ nausea versus placebo. Figure S22. Forest plot representing that the PARPi maintenance therapy for recurrent ovarian cancer increase the risk of fatigue by any grade versus placebo. Figure S23. Forest plot representing that the PARPi maintenance therapy for recurrent ovarian cancer increase the risk of grade 3≤ fatigue versus placebo. Figure S24. Forest plot representing that the PARPi maintenance therapy for recurrent ovarian cancer increase the risk of vomiting by any grade versus placebo. Figure S25. Forest plot representing that the PARPi maintenance therapy for recurrent ovarian cancer increase the risk of grade 3≤ vomiting versus placebo. Figure S26. Forest plot representing that the PARPi maintenance therapy for recurrent ovarian cancer increase the risk of dose modification versus placebo. Figure S27. Forest plot representing that the PARPi maintenance therapy for recurrent ovarian cancer increase the risk of treatment interruption versus placebo. Figure S28. Forest plot representing that the PARPi maintenance therapy for recurrent ovarian cancer increase the risk of treatment discontinuation versus placebo. Figure S29. Forest plot representing that the PARPi maintenance therapy for recurrent ovarian cancer increase the risk of MDS / AML versus placebo. Figure S30. Forest plot representing that the PARPi monotherapy for recurrent ovarian cancer has little to no effect on the risk of anaemia by any grade versus chemotherapy. Figure S31. Forest plot representing that the PARPi monotherapy for recurrent ovarian cancer increase the risk of grade 3≤ anaemia versus placebo. Figure S32. Forest plot representing that the PARPi monotherapy for recurrent ovarian cancer has little to no effect on the risk of thrombocytopenia by any grade versus chemotherapy. Figure S33. Forest plot representing that the PARPi monotherapy for recurrent ovarian cancer has little to no effect on the risk of grade 3≤ thrombocytopenia versus chemotherapy. Figure S34. Forest plot representing that the PARPi monotherapy for recurrent ovarian cancer decrease the risk of neutropenia by any grade versus chemotherapy. Figure S35. Forest plot representing that the PARPi monotherapy for recurrent ovarian cancer has little to no effect on the risk of grade 3≤ neutropenia versus chemotherapy. Figure S36. Forest plot representing that the PARPi monotherapy for recurrent ovarian cancer increase the risk of nausea by any grade versus chemotherapy. Figure S37. Forest plot representing that the PARPi monotherapy for recurrent ovarian cancer has little to no effect on the risk of grade 3≤ nausea versus chemotherapy. Figure S38. Forest plot representing that the PARPi monotherapy for recurrent ovarian cancer increase the risk of fatigue by any grade versus chemotherapy. Figure S39. Forest plot representing that the PARPi monotherapy for recurrent ovarian cancer increase the risk of grade 3≤ fatigue versus chemotherapy. Figure S40. Forest plot representing that the PARPi monotherapy for recurrent ovarian cancer increase the risk of vomiting by any grade versus chemotherapy. Figure S41. Forest plot representing that the PARPi monotherapy for recurrent ovarian cancer has little to no effect on the risk of grade 3≤ vomiting versus chemotherapy. Figure S42. Forest plot representing that the PARPi monotherapy for recurrent ovarian cancer has little to no effect on the risk of dose modification versus chemotherapy. Figure S43. Forest plot representing that the PARPi monotherapy for recurrent ovarian cancer has little to no effect on the risk of MDS / AML versus chemotherapy. Figure S44. Forest plot representing that the PARPi maintenance therapy for newly-diagnosed ovarian cancer has little to no effect on the risk of adverse event by any grade versus placebo. Figure S45. Forest plot representing that the PARPi maintenance therapy for newly-diagnosed ovarian cancer increase the risk of grade 3≤ adverse events versus placebo. Figure S46. Forest plot representing that the PARPi maintenance therapy for newly-diagnosed ovarian cancer increase the risk of serious adverse events versus placebo. Figure S47. Forest plot representing that the PARPi maintenance therapy for newly-diagnosed ovarian cancer increase the risk of anaemia by any grade versus placebo. Figure S48. Forest plot representing that the PARPi maintenance therapy for newly-diagnosed ovarian cancer increase the risk of grade 3≤ anaemia versus placebo. Figure S49. Forest plot representing that the PARPi maintenance therapy for newly-diagnosed ovarian cancer increase the risk of thrombocytopenia by any grade versus placebo. Figure S50. Forest plot representing that the PARPi maintenance therapy for newly-diagnosed ovarian cancer has little to no effect on the risk of grade 3≤ thrombocytopenia versus placebo. Figure S51. Forest plot representing that the PARPi maintenance therapy for newly-diagnosed ovarian cancer increase the risk of neutropenia by any grade versus placebo. Figure S52. Forest plot representing that the PARPi maintenance therapy for newly-diagnosed ovarian cancer increase the risk of grade 3≤ neutropenia versus placebo. Figure S53. Forest plot representing that the PARPi maintenance therapy for newly-diagnosed ovarian cancer increase the risk of nausea by any grade versus placebo. Figure S54. Forest plot representing that the PARPi maintenance therapy for newly-diagnosed ovarian cancer has little to no effect on the risk of grade 3≤ nausea versus placebo. Figure S55. Forest plot representing that the PARPi maintenance therapy for newly-diagnosed ovarian cancer increase the risk of fatigue by any grade versus placebo. Figure S56. Forest plot representing that the PARPi maintenance therapy for newly-diagnosed ovarian cancer has little to no effect on the risk of grade 3≤ fatigue versus placebo. Figure S57. Forest plot representing that the PARPi maintenance therapy for newly-diagnosed ovarian cancer increase the risk of vomiting by any grade versus placebo. Figure S58. Forest plot representing that the PARPi maintenance therapy for newly-diagnosed ovarian cancer has little to no effect on the risk of grade 3≤ vomiting versus placebo. Figure S59. Forest plot representing that the PARPi maintenance therapy for newly-diagnosed ovarian cancer increase the risk of dose modificaion versus placebo. Figure S60. Forest plot representing that the PARPi maintenance therapy for newly-diagnosed ovarian cancer increase the risk of treatmenet interruption versus placebo. Figure S61. Forest plot representing that the PARPi maintenance therapy for newly-diagnosed ovarian cancer increase the risk of treatmenet discontinuation versus placebo. Figure S62. Forest plot representing that the PARPi maintenance therapy for newly-diagnosed ovarian cancer has little to no effect on the risk of MDS / AML versus placebo. Figure S63. Risk of bias summary at study level: for each included trial.