1. Ferlay, J, Shin, H-R, Bray, F, Forman, D, Mathers, C, Parkin, DM. Estimates of worldwide burden of cancer in 2008: GLOBOCAN 2008. Int J Cancer. 2010;127(12):2893–917.
Google Scholar | Crossref2. Goff, BA, Mandel, L, Muntz, HG, Melancon, CH. Ovarian carcinoma diagnosis. Cancer. 2000;89(10):2068–75.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline3. Goodman, MT, Correa, CN, Tung, KH, et al. Stage at diagnosis of ovarian cancer in the United States, 1992-1997. Cancer. 2003;97(10 suppl):2648–59.
Google Scholar4. Stirling, D, Evans, DGR, Pichert, G, et al. Screening for familial ovarian cancer: failure of current protocols to detect ovarian cancer at an early stage according to the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics system. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23(24):5588–96.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline5. National Comprehensive Cancer Network . Clinical Practice Guideline in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines): Ovarian Cancer Including Fallopian Tube Cancer and Primary Peritoneal Cancer. Version 3.2014. Available from: www.nccn.org/patient
Google Scholar6. Aghajanian, C, Blank, SV, Goff, BA, et al. OCEANS: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III trial of chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab in patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent epithelial ovarian, primary peritoneal, or fallopian tube cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30(17):2039–45.
Google Scholar | Crossref7. Aghajanian, C, Goff, B, Nycum, LR, Wang, YV, Husain, A, Blank, SV. Final overall survival and safety analysis of OCEANS, a phase 3 trial of chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab in patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2015;139(1):10–6.
Google Scholar | Crossref8. Bamias, A, Gibbs, E, Khoon Lee, C, et al. Bevacizumab with or after chemotherapy for platinum-resistant recurrent ovarian cancer: exploratory analyses of the AURELIA trial. Ann Oncol. 2017;28(8):1842–8.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline9. Burger, RA, Brady, MF, Bookman, MA, et al. Incorporation of bevacizumab in the primary treatment of ovarian cancer. N Engl J Med. 2011;365(26):2473–83.
Google Scholar | Crossref10. Coleman, RL, Brady, MF, Herzog, TJ, et al. Bevacizumab and paclitaxel-carboplatin chemotherapy and secondary cytoreduction in recurrent, platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer (NRG Oncology/Gynecologic Oncology Group study GOG-0213): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2017;18(6):779–1.
Google Scholar | Crossref11. Oza, AM, Cook, AD, Pfisterer, J, et al. Standard chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab for women with newly diagnosed ovarian cancer (ICON7): overall survival results of a phase 3 randomised trial. Lancet Oncol. 2015;16(8):928–36.
Google Scholar | Crossref12. Perren, TJ, Swart, AM, Pfisterer, J, et al. A phase 3 trial of bevacizumab in ovarian cancer. N Engl J Med. 2011;365(26):2484–96.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline13. Pujade-Lauraine, E, Hilpert, F, Weber, B, et al. Bevacizumab combined with chemotherapy for platinum-resistant recurrent ovarian cancer: The AURELIA open-label randomized phase III trial. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32(13):1302–8.
Google Scholar | Crossref14. Wu, YS, Shui, L, Shen, D, Chen, X. Bevacizumab combined with chemotherapy for ovarian cancer: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Oncotarget. 2017;8(6):10703–13.
Google Scholar | Crossref15. Oza, AM, Cook, AD, Kaplan, R, Parmar, MKB, Perren, TJ; ICON7 Investigators . Discordance between the results and conclusions of ICON7: authors’ reply. Lancet Oncol. 2015;16(13):e478–9.
Google Scholar | Crossref16. Bell, H, Latimer, N, Amonkar, M, Swann, S. Adjusting for treatment switching in RCTs: identifying, analysing and justifying appropriate methods: a case study in metastatic melanoma. Value Health. 2015;18(7):A338.
Google Scholar | Crossref17. Latimer, NR. Treatment switching in oncology trials and the acceptability of adjustment methods. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2015;15(4):561–4.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline18. Latimer, NR, Abrams, KR, Lambert, PC, et al. Adjusting for treatment switching in randomised controlled trials - A simulation study and a simplified two-stage method. Stat Methods Med Res. 2017;26(2):724–51.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals19. Latimer, NR, Abrams, KR, Amonkar, MM, Stapelkamp, C, Swann, RS, Adjusting for the confounding effects of treatment switching—the BREAK-3 Trial: dabrafenib versus dacarbazine. Oncologist. 2015;20(7):798–805.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline20. Latimer, NR, Abrams, KR, Lambert, PC, et al. Adjusting survival time estimates to account for treatment switching in randomized controlled trials: an economic evaluation context: methods, limitations, and recommendations. Med Decis Making. 2014;34(3):387–402.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI21. Latimer, NR, Abrams, KR, Lambert, PC, Morden, JP, Crowther, MJ, Assessing methods for dealing with treatment switching in clinical trials: A follow-up simulation study. Stat Methods Med Res. 2018;27(3):765–84.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals22. Latimer, NR, Henshall, C, Siebert, U, Bell, H. Treatment switching: statistical and decision-making challenges and approaches. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2016;32(3):160–6.
Google Scholar | Crossref23. Morden, JP, Lambert, PC, Latimer, N, Abrams, KR, Wailoo, AJ. Assessing methods for dealing with treatment switching in randomised controlled trials: a simulation study. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2011;11:4.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI24. Watkins, C, Huang, X, Latimer, N, Tang, Y, Wright, EJ. Adjusting overall survival for treatment switches: commonly used methods and practical application. Pharm Stat. 2013;12(6):348–57.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline25. White, IR. Methods for handling treatment switching: rank-preserving structural nested failure time models, inverseprobability-of-censoring weighting, and marginal structural models. Workshop: Methods for Adjusting for Treatment Switches in Late-Stage Cancer Trials; London, UK; February 2012.
Google Scholar26. Pazdur, R. Endpoints for assessing drug activity in clinical trials. Oncologist. 2008;13(suppl 2):19–21.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline27. Stuart, GC, Kitchener, H, Bacon, M, et al. 2010Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup (GCIG) consensus statement on clinical trials in ovarian cancer: report from the Fourth Ovarian Cancer Consensus Conference. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2011;21(4):750–5.
Google Scholar | Crossref28. Bullement, A, Latimer, NR, Gorrod, HB. Survival extrapolation in cancer immunotherapy: a validation-based case study. Value Health. 2019;22(3):276–83.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline29. Gorrod, HB, Latimer, NR, Damian, D, Hettle, R, Harty, GT, Wong, SL. Impact of nonrandomized dropout on treatment switching adjustment in the relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis CLARITY trial and the CLARITY extension study. Value Health. 2019;22(7):772–6.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline30. National Institute of Health and Care Excellence . Sunitinib for the treatment of gastrointestinal stromal tumours. NICE Technology Appraisals [TA179]. London: NICE; 2009.
Google Scholar31. National Institute of Health and Care Excellence . Pazopanib for the first-line treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma. NICE Technology Appraisals [TA215]. London: NICE; 2011.
Google Scholar32. National Institute of Health and Care Excellence . Everolimus for the second-line treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma. NICE Technology Appraisals [TA219]. London: NICE; 2011.
Google Scholar33. Jonsson, L, Sandin, R, Ekman, M, et al. Analyzing overall survival in randomized controlled trials with crossover and implications for economic evaluation. Value Health. 2014;17(6):707–13.
Google Scholar | Crossref34. Ouwens, M, Mukhopadhyay, P, Zhang, Y, Huang, M, Latimer, N, Briggs, A. Estimating lifetime benefits associated with immuno-oncology therapies: challenges and approaches for overall survival extrapolations. Pharmacoeconomics. 2019;37(9):1129–38.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline35. Bullement, A, Meng, Y, Cooper, M, et al. A review and validation of overall survival extrapolation in health technology assessments of cancer immunotherapy by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence: how did the initial best estimate compare to trial data subsequently made available? J Med Econ. 2019;22(3):205–14.
Google Scholar | Medline36. Latimer, NR, White, IR, Tilling, K, Siebert, U. Improved two-stage estimation to adjust for treatment switching in randomised trials: g-estimation to address time-dependent confounding. Stat Methods Med Res. 2020;29(10):2900–18.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals37. Latimer, NR, White, IR, Abrams, KR, Siebert, U. Causal inference for long-term survival in randomised trials with treatment switching: should re-censoring be applied when estimating counterfactual survival times? Stat Methods Med Res. 2019;28(8):2475–493.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals38. Latimer, NR, Abrams, KR, Siebert, U. Two-stage estimation to adjust for treatment switching in randomised trials: a simulation study investigating the use of inverse probability weighting instead of re-censoring. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2019;19(1):69.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline39. Henshall, C, Latimer, NR, Sansom, L, Ward, RL. Treatment switching in cancer trials: issues and proposals. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2016;32(3):167–74.
Google Scholar | Crossref40. Smolle, E, Taucher, V, Haybaeck, J. Malignant ascites in ovarian cancer and the role of targeted therapeutics. Anticancer Res. 2014;34(4):1553–61.
Google Scholar41. Arikan, SK, Kasap, B, Yetimalar, H, Yildiz, A, Sakarya, DK, Tatar, S. Impact of prognostic factors on survival rates in patients with ovarian carcinoma. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2014;15(15):6087–94.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline42. Kobold, S, Hegewisch-Becker, S, Oechsle, K, Jordan, K, Bokemeyer, C, Atanackovic, D. Intraperitoneal VEGF inhibition using bevacizumab: a potential approach for the symptomatic treatment of malignant ascites? Oncologist. 2009;14(12):1242–51.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline43. Hunink, M, Weinstein, MC, Wittenberg, M, et al. Valuing outcomes. In: Hunink, M, Weinstein, MC, Wittenberg, M, et al., eds. Decision Making in Health and Medicine: Integrating Evience and Values. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2012. p 88–127.
Google Scholar44. Siebert, U. When should decision analytic modeling be used in the economic evaluation of health care? Eur J Health Econ. 2003;4:143–50.
Google Scholar | Crossref45. Siebert, U, Alagoz, O, Bayoumi, AM, et al. State-transition modeling: a report of the ISPOR-SMDM Modeling Good Research Practices Task Force-3. Value Health. 2012;15(6):812–20.
Google Scholar | Crossref46. Siebert, U, Alagoz, O, Bayoumi, AM, et al. State-transition modeling: a report of the ISPOR-SMDM Modeling Good Research Practices Task Force-3. Med Decis Making. 2012;32(5):690–700.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI47. Gray, AM, Clarke, PM, Wolstenholme, J, Wordsworth, S, Applied methods of cost-effectiveness analysis in health care. In: Handbooks in Health Economic Evaluation Series. New York: Oxford University Press; 2011.
Google Scholar48. Greenland, S, Pearl, J, Robins, JM. Causal diagrams for epidemiologic research. Epidemiology. 1999;10(1):37–48.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI49. Caro, JJ, Briggs, AH, Siebert, U, Kuntz, KM; ISPOR-SMDM Modeling Good Research Practices Task Force . Modeling good research practices—overview: a report of the ISPOR-SMDM Modeling Good Research Practices Task Force-1. Med Decis Making. 2012;32(5):667–77.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals50. Caro, JJ, Briggs, AH, Siebert, U, et al. Modeling good research practices—overview: a report of the ISPOR-SMDM Modeling Good Research Practices Task Force-1. Value Health. 2012;15:796–803.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline51. Eddy, D, DM, Hollingworth, W, Caro, JJ, et al. Model transparency and validation: a report of the ISPOR-SMDM Modeling Good Research Practices Task Force-7 [plus editorial]. Med Decis Making. 2012;32:733–43.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals52. Eddy, D, Hollingworth, W, Caro, JJ, et al. Model transparency and validation: a report of the ISPOR-SMDM Modeling Good Research Practices Task Force-7. Value Health. 2012;15:843–50.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline53. Eskander, RN, Tewari, KS. Emerging treatment options for management of malignant ascites in patients with ovarian cancer. Int J Womens Health. 2012;4:395–404.
Google Scholar | Medline54. Poveda, AM, Selle, F, Hilpert, F, et al. Bevacizumab combined with weekly paclitaxel, pegylated liposomal doxorubicin, or topotecan in platinum-resistant recurrent ovarian cancer: analysis by chemotherapy cohort of the randomized phase III AURELIA trial. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(32):3836–8.
Google Scholar | Crossref55. Kristensen, G, Berton-Rigaud, D, Hilpert, F, et al., editors. Effect of bevacizumab combined with chemotherapy for platinum-resistant recurrent ovarian cancer with ascites: Analysis of the AURELIA trial. International Gynecologic Cancer Society (IGCS) Conference; ; Vancouver, Canada.
Google Scholar56. El-Shami, K, Elsaid, A, El-Kerm, Y. Open-label safety and efficacy pilot trial of intraperitoneal bevacizumab as palliative treatment in refractory malignant ascites. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25(18 suppl):9043.
Google Scholar | Crossref57. Hamilton, CA, Maxwell, GL, Chernofsky, MR, Bernstein, SA, Farley, JH, Rose, GS. Intraperitoneal bevacizumab for the palliation of malignant ascites in refractory ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2008;111(3):530–2.