• Ninke Leffers, Toos Daemen, Wijnand Helfrich, H Marike Boezen, Ben J Cohlen, Cornelis J M Melief, and Hans W Nijman.
• Obstetrics & Gynecology CB30, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Hanzeplein 1, P.O. Box 30.001, Groningen, Netherlands, 9700 RB.
• Cochrane Db Syst Rev. 2014 Sep 17 (9): CD007287.

BackgroundDespite advances in chemotherapy, prognosis of ovarian cancer remains poor. Antigen-specific active immunotherapy aims to induce tumour-antigen-specific anti-tumour immune responses as an alternative treatment for ovarian cancer.ObjectivesTo assess the feasibility of antigen-specific active immunotherapy for ovarian cancer. Primary outcomes are clinical efficacy and antigen-specific immunogenicity with carrier-specific immunogenicity and side effects as secondary outcomes.Search MethodsFor the previous version of this review, a systematic search of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) 2009, Issue 3, Cochrane Gynaecological Cancer Group Specialized Register, MEDLINE and EMBASE databases and clinicaltrials.gov was performed (1966 to July 2009). We conducted handsearches of the proceedings of relevant annual meetings (1996 to July 2009).For this update of the review the searches were extended to October 2013.Selection CriteriaRandomised controlled trials (RCTs), as well as non-randomised non-controlled studies that included participants with epithelial ovarian cancer, irrespective of stage of disease, and treated with antigen-specific active immunotherapy, irrespective of type of vaccine, antigen used, adjuvant used, route of vaccination, schedule, and reported clinical or immunological outcomes.Data Collection And AnalysisTwo reviews authors independently performed the data extraction. Risk of bias was evaluated for RCTs according to standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collabororation or for non-RCTs using a selection of quality domains deemed best applicable to the non-randomised non-controlled studies.Main ResultsFifty-five studies were included (representing 3051 women with epithelial ovarian cancer). Response definitions showed substantial variation between trials, which makes comparison of trial results unreliable. Information on adverse events was frequently limited. Furthermore, reports of both RCTs and non-RCTs frequently lacked the relevant information necessary to assess risk of bias. Serious biases in most of the included trials can therefore not be ruled out.The largest body of evidence is currently available for CA-125 targeted antibody therapy (16 studies: 2339 participants). Non-RCTs of CA-125 targeted antibody therapy suggests increased survival in humoral and/or cellular responders. However, four large randomised placebo-controlled trials did not show any clinical benefit despite induction of immune responses in approximately 60% of participants.Other small studies targeting many different tumour antigens showed promising immunological results. As these strategies have not yet been tested in RCTs, no reliable inferences about clinical efficacy can be made. Given the promising immunological results, limited side effects and toxicity exploration of clinical efficacy in large well-designed RCTs may be worthwhile.Authors' ConclusionsWe conclude that despite promising immunological responses, no clinically effective antigen-specific active immunotherapy is yet available for ovarian cancer. Results should be interpreted cautiously as there was a significant lack of relevant information for the assessment of risk of bias in both RCTs and non-RCTs.

27 keywords...

hide…