Auto-discovered from 1 recent study; not yet curated.
3 studies2 human1 review/other
Tracking 3 published studies of Rucaparib: 2 in humans, 1 reviews/other.
Reported direction across studies: 1 mixed, 2 inconclusive.
These counts summarize what the studies reported; they are not a measure of whether Rucaparib works.
Meta-analysisMixed resultsModerate evidenceTier 4 · clinical
Taiwanese journal of obstetrics & gynecology · Sep 2024 · systematic review and meta-analysis
Rucaparibrecurrent high-grade ovarian carcinomaovarian cancer This systematic review and meta-analysis pooled seven studies of rucaparib in patients with recurrent high-grade ovarian carcinoma. The pooled objective response rate (ORR) was 0.331 (95% CI 0.221–0.449) with high between-study heterogeneity (I2 = 92.4%), and the authors report improvements in PFS and OS versus controls. Safety signals were substantial: 98.7% experienced any treatment-emergent adverse event and 61% had grade ≥3 events; common AEs and hematologic abnormalities were reported.
Reported effects: number_of_articles 7 · ORR 0.331 [0.221–0.449] · +10 more
Key findings
- The meta-analysis of seven articles revealed a pooled objective response rate (ORR) of 0.331 (95% CI, 0.221-0.449; I2=92.4%), particularly evident in the BRCA-mutated cohort.
- Rucaparib consistently outperformed controls in progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS).
- Safety evaluations indicated that 98.7% of patients experienced treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), with 61% being grade 65;3.
- Notable TEAEs included nausea (69.0%), fatigue (66.8%), vomiting (37.3%), and constipation (32.1%).
- Hematological concerns comprised anemia (47.9%), thrombocytopenia, elevated AST/ALT (37.3%), and serum creatinine levels (19.7%).
- The authors note that the rucaparib group recorded higher event rates across various metrics than controls and recommend careful monitoring and dose adjustments.
Limitations: High between-study heterogeneity (I2 = 92.4%) reported for the pooled ORR.; Pooled estimate derived from seven articles only, which may limit generalizability.; Abstract reports no numeric effect sizes (HRs/CIs) for PFS or OS despite stating improvements versus controls.; High rates of treatment-emergent adverse events and grade 65;3 events raise tolerability concerns affecting applicability..
AI summary of the abstract, human-reviewed · Jul 2026. Describes what this study reported, not medical advice. View on PubMed
ReviewTrialInconclusiveLimited evidenceTier 4 · clinicaln = 11
Revista colombiana de obstetricia y ginecologia · Jun 2024 · expert consensus / practice guideline based on literature review
This paper is an expert consensus, not a clinical study of a single drug. Eleven specialists reviewed the literature and issued recommendations for managing advanced or metastatic high-grade epithelial ovarian cancer, including surgery, chemotherapy, genetic testing, bevacizumab, and PARP inhibitors. It does not report new patient outcomes from a trial. The document mainly summarizes what the panel suggested based on existing guidelines and evidence.
Studied with: platinum-based chemotherapy, bevacizumab, paclitaxel, carboplatin.
Key findings
- The panel suggested primary cytoreductive surgery as the initial approach when complete resection is feasible.
- Neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by interval surgery was suggested when complete cytoreduction is unlikely or the patient has poor functional status/comorbidities.
- Bevacizumab was suggested with platinum-based chemotherapy for high-risk disease, with maintenance only if it was part of first-line therapy.
- PARP inhibitors (olaparib, niraparib, rucaparib) were suggested as maintenance in selected BRCA/HRD-defined groups.
- For platinum-resistant relapse, sequential non-platinum single-agent chemotherapy and best supportive care for poor performance status were suggested.
Limitations: This is a consensus statement/practice guideline, not an original comparative trial.; No new efficacy or safety data are reported in the abstract.; Recommendations are based on literature review and expert agreement, so they are subject to guideline-selection and expert-opinion bias.; The abstract does not provide patient-level outcomes, follow-up, or effect estimates.; Several recommendations are conditional/suggested rather than based on direct evidence from this paper..
Provides management recommendations for advanced/metastatic epithelial ovarian cancer, including several anticancer agents and maintenance strategies.
AI summary of the abstract, human-reviewed · Jun 2026. Describes what this study reported, not medical advice. View on PubMed · Full text
Human trialTrialInconclusiveLimited evidenceTier 4 · clinicaln = 1000
International journal of gynecological cancer : official journal of the International Gynecological Cancer Society · Dec 2021 · Randomized, double-blind, phase III, international, multicenter; two independent comparisons (ATHENA-MONO and ATHENA-COMBO) with 4:4:1:1 randomization
RucaparibNivolumabovarian cancerfallopian tube cancerprimary peritoneal cancerhigh-grade epithelial ovarian cancer This report describes ATHENA, a randomized, double-blind phase III trial testing rucaparib as frontline maintenance versus placebo (ATHENA-MONO) and rucaparib plus nivolumab versus rucaparib alone (ATHENA-COMBO) in women with newly diagnosed ovarian, fallopian tube, or peritoneal cancer who responded to platinum-based chemotherapy. About 1000 patients were randomized into four arms (rucaparib+nivolumab; rucaparib+placebo; placebo+nivolumab; placebo+placebo); the primary endpoint is investigator-assessed progression-free survival. The trial completed accrual in 2020 and primary results for ATHENA-MONO were anticipated in early 2022; no outcome data are reported in this abstract.
Studied with: nivolumab.
Key findings
- Primary objectives: assess rucaparib monotherapy versus placebo (ATHENA-MONO) and rucaparib+nivolumab versus rucaparib alone (ATHENA-COMBO) as frontline maintenance after response to platinum-based chemotherapy.
- Design: international, randomized, double-blind phase III trial with two independent comparisons sharing a common arm; patients randomized 4:4:1:1 to arms A–D.
- Dosing: rucaparib starting dose 600 mg orally twice daily; nivolumab 480 mg IV every 4 weeks.
- Primary endpoint: investigator-assessed progression-free survival per RECIST v1.1.
- Sample size and status: approximately 1000 patients enrolled and randomized; accrual completed in 2020; ATHENA-MONO primary results anticipated in early 2022, ATHENA-COMBO to mature later.
Limitations: Abstract reports trial design and enrollment only; no efficacy or safety results are provided.; Primary endpoint is investigator-assessed PFS (no mention of blinded central review in abstract).; Population limited to patients who achieved response to initial cytoreductive surgery and platinum-based chemotherapy; results may not generalize to all ovarian cancer patients.; Although comparisons are independently powered, ATHENA-MONO and ATHENA-COMBO share a common treatment arm, which may have analytic implications (not detailed in abstract)..
AI summary of the abstract, human-reviewed · Jul 2026. Describes what this study reported, not medical advice. View on PubMed · Full text
Evidence at a glance: Rucaparib by cancer
A deterministic grade of what published studies report for each: strength of evidence, the reported direction, and the largest credible effect, strongest-evidence first. This summarizes findings; it is not a claim that anything works.
Inclusion here is not an endorsement. OncoForge makes no claim beyond what the linked studies show. Discuss anything on this page with your oncology team before acting on it.