Global research trends in PARP inhibitors for ovarian cancer: a bibliometric analysis

Abstract

This bibliometric analysis maps global research trends on PARP inhibitors (PARPis) in ovarian cancer from January 2021 to May 2025, utilizing 1,434 publications retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection. Employing Bibliometrix, VOSviewer, and CiteSpace, the study quantifies contributions across countries, institutions, authors, and research foci. Key findings reveal the United States (440 publications) and China (352) as leading producers, with UNICANCER (287 publications) and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (61) as top institutions. Keyword clustering identified six research themes: PARPi resistance mechanisms (Cluster 1, red) emerged as the dominant focus, followed by immunotherapy combinations for platinum-resistant disease (Cluster 2, green), maintenance therapy (Cluster 3, blue), BRCA mutations (Cluster 4, yellow), applications beyond ovarian cancer (Cluster 5, purple), and anti-angiogenic mechanisms (Cluster 6, light blue). Temporal analysis highlighted an evolution from foundational research (e.g., DNA repair pathways) toward clinical translation (e.g., maintenance therapy optimization). Notable citation bursts surrounded clinical milestones, including the SOLO1 trial’s 7-year overall survival data (burst strength: 23.99), underscoring the field’s emphasis on survival outcomes. Critical gaps persist in understanding resistance mechanisms and developing immuno-combination strategies, which constituted only 4.8% of keyword frequency. The study underscores the need for intensified research into resistance mitigation and transnational collaboration, particularly between established Euro-American networks and emerging East Asian hubs, to address therapeutic challenges and optimize clinical impact.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12672-025-03487-y.

Introduction

Ovarian cancer persists as one of the most lethal gynecologic malignancies globally. A significant challenge lies in its frequent late-stage diagnosis, with over 70% of cases identified at advanced stages, contributing to a persistently dismal 5-year survival rate below 50% [1–3]. This grim reality necessitates urgent therapeutic innovation. The introduction of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPis)—a class of targeted drugs that inhibit a critical enzyme involved in DNA repair—has revolutionized treatment for specific patient subgroups. These subgroups include individuals with germline or somatic mutations in the BRCA1/2 genes, which encode essential proteins for high-fidelity DNA double-strand break repair via homologous recombination [4–7], and those exhibiting homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) [8], a genomic instability phenotype arising from impaired function in this DNA repair pathway [3, 9].

Following the pivotal 2014 FDA approval of olaparib, PARPis have become foundational to ovarian cancer maintenance therapy. Their efficacy is underscored by significant extensions in progression-free survival (PFS)—defined as the duration from treatment initiation until disease progression or death—particularly in platinum-sensitive recurrent settings [2, 10]. However, acquired resistance emerges in 40–60% of initial responders, ultimately limiting gains in overall survival (OS)—the definitive metric measuring survival time from diagnosis or treatment start to death from any cause [11–13]. Critically, the specific molecular mechanisms driving the emergence and evolution of PARP inhibitor resistance remain incompletely elucidated [14]. Bibliometrics [15], defined as the quantitative analysis of scientific literature, provides a powerful methodological framework for mapping the evolution of research fields [16]. By leveraging large-scale data mining and sophisticated visualization techniques, bibliometric analysis can objectively delineate the evolutionary trajectory of a scientific domain, identify shifts in its knowledge structure, pinpoint research hotspots, reveal collaborative networks, and highlight emergent trends and potential breakthroughs. Applying this approach to the dynamic field of PARP inhibitor research in ovarian cancer offers a unique opportunity to synthesize the vast and rapidly expanding body of literature.

To capture the most recent developments and emerging frontiers, this study focuses on publications from January 2021 to May 2025. We extracted 1,434 relevant publications from the Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC) on May 31, 2025, covering approximately 4.5 years of data. we conducted a rigorous bibliometric analysis of the downloaded plain-text data. The primary objective of this analysis is to comprehensively map the current global research landscape surrounding PARP inhibitors in ovarian cancer [17–21]. By identifying key contributors, institutions, countries, research foci, and evolving trends, this study aims to provide novel insights into the field’s development, highlight critical knowledge gaps (particularly concerning resistance mechanisms and overcoming strategies), and offer valuable guidance for directing future research endeavors towards areas of highest impact and clinical need.

Materials and methods

Data source and search strategy

A comprehensive retrieval of original articles and reviews covering publications from January 2021 to May 2025 was conducted on May 31, 2025, from the Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC) database (https://www.webofscience.com/wos/woscc/basic-search), exclusively utilizing the SCI-EXPANDED (Science Citation Index Expanded) subset to ensure the academic authority and biomedical focus of the included literature.

The search query was configured as: (TS=((“Ovarian Neoplasms” OR “Neoplasm, Ovarian” OR “Ovarian Neoplasm” OR “Neoplasms, Ovarian” OR “Ovary Neoplasms” OR “Neoplasm, Ovary” OR “Neoplasms, Ovary” OR “Ovary Neoplasm” OR “Ovary Cancer” OR “Cancer, Ovary” OR “Cancers, Ovary” OR “Ovary Cancers” OR “Cancer of Ovary” OR “Cancer of the Ovary” OR “Ovarian Cancer” OR “Cancer, Ovarian” OR “Cancers, Ovarian” OR “Ovarian Cancers”) AND (“Poly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase Inhibitors” OR “Inhibitors of Poly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase” OR “PARP Inhibitor” OR “Inhibitor, PARP” OR “Poly(ADP-ribosylation) Inhibitor” OR “PARP Inhibitors” OR “Inhibitors, PARP” OR “Inhibitors of Poly(ADP-ribose) Polymerases” OR “Poly(ADP-Ribose) Polymerase Inhibitor” OR “Poly(ADP-ribosylation) Inhibitors”))) OR TI=((“Ovarian Neoplasms” OR “Neoplasm, Ovarian” OR “Ovarian Neoplasm” OR “Neoplasms, Ovarian” OR “Ovary Neoplasms” OR “Neoplasm, Ovary” OR “Neoplasms, Ovary” OR “Ovary Neoplasm” OR “Ovary Cancer” OR “Cancer, Ovary” OR “Cancers, Ovary” OR “Ovary Cancers” OR “Cancer of Ovary” OR “Cancer of the Ovary” OR “Ovarian Cancer” OR “Cancer, Ovarian” OR “Cancers, Ovarian” OR “Ovarian Cancers”) AND (“Poly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase Inhibitors” OR “Inhibitors of Poly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase” OR “PARP Inhibitor” OR “Inhibitor, PARP” OR “Poly(ADP-ribosylation) Inhibitor” OR “PARP Inhibitors” OR “Inhibitors, PARP” OR “Inhibitors of Poly(ADP-ribose) Polymerases” OR “Poly(ADP-Ribose) Polymerase Inhibitor” OR “Poly(ADP-ribosylation) Inhibitors”))) OR AB=((“Ovarian Neoplasms” OR “Neoplasm, Ovarian” OR “Ovarian Neoplasm” OR “Neoplasms, Ovarian” OR “Ovary Neoplasms” OR “Neoplasm, Ovary” OR “Neoplasms, Ovary” OR “Ovary Neoplasm” OR “Ovary Cancer” OR “Cancer, Ovary” OR “Cancers, Ovary” OR “Ovary Cancers” OR “Cancer of Ovary” OR “Cancer of the Ovary” OR “Ovarian Cancer” OR “Cancer, Ovarian” OR “Cancers, Ovarian” OR “Ovarian Cancers”) AND (“Poly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase Inhibitors” OR “Inhibitors of Poly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase” OR “PARP Inhibitor” OR “Inhibitor, PARP” OR “Poly(ADP-ribosylation) Inhibitor” OR “PARP Inhibitors” OR “Inhibitors, PARP” OR “Inhibitors of Poly(ADP-ribose) Polymerases” OR “Poly(ADP-Ribose) Polymerase Inhibitor” OR “Poly(ADP-ribosylation) Inhibitors”)). The search process was conducted simultaneously by two researchers, who screened the literature. Any disagreements were resolved through discussion to reach consensus. Among all retrieved publications, only English-language articles and reviews were analyzed. Ultimately, 1,434 publications were accessed and comprehensively studied, with the access and analytical workflow detailed in Fig. 1.

Fig. 1.

Study flow chart

Visualization and statistical analysis

This study employed R version 4.5.0, VOSviewer, and CiteSpace as software tools for conducting bibliometric analysis [22–24]. We utilized the Bibliometrix R package version 5.0.0 to calculate the frequency of collaboration between countries. Publication counts, citations, and keyword frequencies were computed using VOSviewer. Leveraging the software’s embedded clustering algorithm, co-occurrence networks of essential keywords in the scientific literature were constructed and visualized. Co-authorship and co-occurrence analyses served as the primary focus of this research. These tools were applied to examine collaboration among countries, institutions, and authors. CiteSpace was employed to identify highly cited references and keywords demonstrating significant citation bursts within specific time periods.

Results

Research profile

According to the search strategy (Fig. 1), 1434 eligible publications from 2021–May 2025 are retrieved. Figure 2 depicts the current research landscape of PARP inhibitors in ovarian cancer using bibliometric analysis. The average number of authors per article ranged from 9 to 10; 2,318 author keywords were provided, and 41,813 references were cited. The average cited half-life of papers was 2.15 years, and the average citation count per paper ranged from 12 to 13.

Fig. 2.

Overall literature analysis conducted using Bibliometrix R package version 5.0.0. These literature data were retrieved and exported in one batch on 31 May 2025. Basic information from 1,434 related publications. Metrics comprise: the time span of included articles, number of journal categories, total article count, annual growth rate, total authors, articles published per single author, proportion of internationally co-authored publications, number of co-authors per article, author-provided keywords, total references cited, average cited half-life per article, and average citation count per article

Analysis of national publication counts

The national publication counts were studied in order to determine which countries/regions have made the most significant contributions to this field. In Fig. 3, the United States ranks first with 440 publications, followed by China (352), Italy (197), England (169), Spain (105), Japan (98), Germany (86), Canada (81), South Korea (78), Australia (65) and Denmark (50). The remaining countries/regions have fewer than 50 publications.

Fig. 3.

Analysis of each country’s contribution to this field was conducted using Bibliometrix R package version 5.0.0 and Excel, with literature data retrieved and exported in one batch on 31 May 2025

As part of our investigation, we visualized the collaborations among countries/regions in Supplementary Fig. 1. According to the results, the United States has been leading in research on PARP inhibitors for ovarian cancer over the past few years. The most frequent collaborations are between the US and United Kingdom (with a frequency of 47). Next are Italy and Spain (frequency = 53), and France and Spain (frequency = 49). Thirty-eight countries have published five or more articles (38/70). We conducted a co-authorship analysis of all publications from the 38 countries above (Supplementary Fig. 2) to investigate the collaboration between countries. The size of the circles in the clustering network and the time-overlapping network represent the number of publications. The color of the circles indicates the collaboration strength of the research groups in the clustering network. The colors of the circles represent the average publication year for each country in a specific area of research in the time-overlapping network. As shown in Supplementary Fig. 2, the 38 countries formed six clusters. The red cluster, which includes most countries, has fourteen countries. In Supplemental Figure S2B, Over the past few years, China’s research in this field has been more concentrated between August 2022 and February 2023. Recently, nations including Denmark and Belgium have demonstrated heightened interest in this domain.

Analysis of institution publications

To investigate how different institutions contribute to the field of PARP inhibitor research in ovarian cancer, publication counts from institutions across different organizations approximately the last 4.5 years were analyzed. This research on the field is being carried out globally across approximately 2638 institutions. Figure 4 presents the world’s top 20 institutions in terms of publication output within this domain during the last few years. The distribution includes nine U.S.-based institutions, three each from France, Italy, and China, two from the U.K., and one Canadian institution. UNICANCER leads with 287 publications, while Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and Shandong University share 20th place at 61 publications each. To further investigate collaboration between institutions, we performed a co-authorship analysis of all publications. Supplementary Fig. 3A, shows that 88 institutions published at least 10 papers. These 88 institutions formed six clusters, with the red cluster being the largest, consisting of 25 institutions, mainly from United States. over the past approximately 4.5 years, U.S. research entities—with AstraZeneca as the primary driver in the initial phase—demonstrated the highest impact in this domain. Currently, Japanese institutions are playing an increasingly substantial role.

Fig. 4.

Analysis conducted using the Bibliometrix R package version 5.0.0 and Excel: The top 20 institutions by number of publications in the field of PARP inhibitors for ovarian cancer research

Analysis of publication quantity and journal impact

The study included 1434 articles published in 380 journals. Table 1 presents the top 10 journals publishing the most articles in the ovarian cancer PARP inhibitor research field over the past 4.5 years. Swiss journals dominate (with five journals), followed by the United States (three) and the United Kingdom (two). Ranked highest by the latest 2025 Impact Factor [25] is Clinical Cancer Research from the US (IF = 10.00), while Cancers leads in the number of publications. Most journals fall within JCR Quartile 1–3 categories.

Table 1.

Top 10 journals in ovarian cancer PARP inhibitor research

Rank	Sources	Country	IF	H-index	JCR-c
1	Cancers	Switzerland	4.4	43.5	3
2	Frontiers in oncology	Switzerland	3.3	35.5	3
3	Gynecologic oncology	United States	4.1	17	2
4	International journal of molecular sciences	Switzerland	4.9	36.875	3
5	International journal of gynecological cancer	United States	4.7	18	3
6	Clinical cancer research	United States	10.2	36	1
7	Journal of gynecologic oncology	South Korea	3.7	13	2
8	Frontiers in pharmacology	Switzerland	4.8	39	3
9	British journal of cancer	England	6.8	27	2
10	European journal of cancer	England	7.1	25	1

IF: Journal Impact Factor

H-index: Author/journal metric: *h* papers with at least *h* citations each

JCR-c: JCR Category: Subject classification in Journal Citation Reports

Both IF and H-Index were retrieved on 23 June 2025

Author impact analysis

A total of 9065 authors participated in research related to PARP inhibitors for ovarian cancer. Table 2 presents the top 10 most productive authors in the field of ovarian cancer PARP inhibitor research over the past 4.5 years. Lorusso D is the most prolific author with 42 publications and an H-index [26] of 63, followed by Colombo N with 38 articles and an H-index of 47. Notably, Scambia G demonstrates a remarkably high H-index of 100, significantly surpassing other scholars. All top 10 authors have published at least 22 articles, with publications ranging from 22 to 42.

Table 2.

Top 10 authors in ovarian cancer PARP inhibitor research

Rank	Authors	Articles	H-index
1	Lorusso D	42	63
2	Colombo N	38	47
3	Scambia G	37	100
4	Ray-Coquard I	31	88
5	Coleman RL	26	45
6	Pignata S	26	32
7	Lee JY	23	85
8	Oaknin A	23	53
9	González-Martín A	22	54
10	Leary A	22	51

H-index: Author/journal metric: *h* papers with at least *h* citations each;

H-Index were retrieved on 24 June 2025

Researchers’ collaborative relationships are illustrated in Supplementary Fig. 4. Circle size represents the number of publications, and color represents cluster. One hundred and eighty-two authors with five or more articles were grouped into 14 clusters. The vast majority of research clusters maintain strong collaborative ties, while a minority of peripheral clusters exhibit weaker connections to core groups. The research team represented by Italian scholar Lorusso D demonstrates extensive collaborative ties with investigators across multiple clusters, with Lorusso D ranking first in publication volume within this field over the past 4.5 years. Time-overlapping network analysis presented in Supplementary Figure S4B further reveals dynamic evolutionary patterns within the collaboration network, highlighting sustained inter-institutional and cross-national collaboration as a key future focus area.

Research hotspot analysis

Most cited publications

It is possible to evaluate the most cited articles based on the frequency of citations in that field. In Table 3, we list the top 10 most cited publications, with all articles cited over 170 times. Ranked 1st is the 2020 Version 2 NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines for Ovarian Cancer [27], cited 467 times. This highlights the central role of guideline standards in directing the clinical application of PARP inhibitors. The literature ranked 2nd and 6th focuses on basic research into the mechanisms of action of PARP inhibitors [1, 28].

Table 3.

The top 10 cited articles

Rank	Title	Year, Journal	First author	Total citations	TC per year
1	Ovarian Cancer, Version 2.2020, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology	2021, Journal of The National Comprehensive Cancer Network	Deborah K Armstrong	467	93.40
2	Targeting DNA damage response pathways in cancer	2023, Nature Reviews Cancer	Florian J Groelly	395	131.67
3	Understanding and overcoming resistance to PARP inhibitors in cancer therapy	2021, Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology	Mariana Paes Dias	309	61.80
4	Olaparib tablets as maintenance therapy in patients with platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer and a BRCA1/2 mutation (SOLO2/ENGOT-Ov21): a final analysis of a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial	2021, Lancet Oncology	Andrés Poveda	298	59.60
5	Overall Survival With Maintenance Olaparib at a 7-Year Follow-Up in Patients With Newly Diagnosed Advanced Ovarian Cancer and a BRCA Mutation: The SOLO1/GOG 3004 Trial	2023, Journal of Clinical Oncology	Paul DiSilvestro	257	85.67
6	Maintenance olaparib for patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer and a BRCA mutation (SOLO1/GOG 3004): 5-year follow-up of a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial	2021, Lancet Oncology	Susana Banerjee	242	48.40
7	PARP inhibition promotes ferroptosis via repressing SLC7A11 and synergizes with ferroptosis inducers in BRCA-proficient ovarian cancer	2021, Redox Biology	Ting Hong	236	47.20
8	Updates and New Options in Advanced Epithelial Ovarian Cancer Treatment	2021, Obstetrics And Gynecology	Katherine C Kurnit	209	41.80
9	Myelodysplastic syndrome and acute myeloid leukaemia in patients treated with PARP inhibitors: a safety meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials and a retrospective study of the WHO pharmacovigilance database	2021, Lancet Haematology	Pierre-Marie Morice	179	35.80
10	Efficacy and Safety of Mirvetuximab Soravtansine in Patients With Platinum-Resistant Ovarian Cancer With High Folate Receptor Alpha Expression: Results From the SORAYA Study	2023, Journal of Clinical Oncology	Ursula A Matulonis	179	59.67

TC per Year: Total citations received per year

The article ranked 3rd, published in the journal《Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology》by Dias et al., reviews the issue of PARP inhibitor resistance [29]. It notes that the key to overcoming resistance lies in the modulation of DNA repair pathways and proposes combination therapies as a solution, offering new perspectives for scholars in this field.

The literature ranked 8th, by Kurnit et al., analyzes the hematologic toxicity associated with PARP inhibitors [30], bringing attention to the safety concerns of long-term medication use.

Analysis of citation bursts

The top 25 most cited references are illustrated in Supplementary Fig. 5. A burst is when a publication receives a significantly higher number of citations than usual, lasting at least two years [24]. The blue line represents the observation period from 2021 to May 2025, while the red line indicates the burst time. The study titled ‘Olaparib tablets as maintenance therapy in patients with platinum-sensitive, relapsed ovarian cancer and a BRCA1/2 mutation (SOLO2/ENGOT-Ov21)‘ [10], published in《Lancet Oncology》 (Pujade-Lauraine E, 2017), exhibited the highest citation burst strength (38.39) during the 2021–May 2025 period. This indicates an explosive surge in its citation frequency over the past 4.5 years. This phenomenon likely stems from its role in establishing the cornerstone status of olaparib in the maintenance therapy for platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer and its contribution to subsequent updates in clinical practice guidelines for PARP inhibitors. Furthermore, 14 publications are currently experiencing an active citation burst (2023–2025). Among these, the study ‘Overall Survival With Maintenance Olaparib at a 7-Year Follow-Up in Patients With Newly Diagnosed Advanced Ovarian Cancer and a BRCA Mutation: The SOLO1/GOG 3004 Trial‘ [31], published in the《Journal of Clinical Oncology》, leads with a burst strength of 23.99. The research by DiSilvestro P et al. (2023) reported for the first time the 7-year overall survival (OS) benefit data for olaparib in newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer. It confirmed a significant extension in survival time for patients harboring BRCA mutations, thereby providing long-term evidence-based support for first-line maintenance therapy. Consequently, this finding has sustained high levels of attention within the scientific community.

Frequency and clustering analysis of keywords

Among the 3961 keywords analyzed, 203 achieved an occurrence count of at least 10 and were consolidated into semantically coherent terms. Figure 5A visualizes their co-occurrence network, where node size reflects keyword frequency and proximity indicates relational strength [23]. To investigate key themes in this research field, 203 keywords were clustered into six distinct clusters. Keywords with closely related meanings were grouped together. Cluster 1 (represented in red) focuses on the mechanisms of action and resistance of PARP inhibitors, exemplified by keywords such as ‘apoptosis’, ‘dna damage response’, and ‘parp inhibitor resistance’. Cluster 2 (represented in green) centers on immunotherapy combinations for advanced platinum-resistant ovarian cancer, with keywords including ‘Platinum-resistant ovarian’, ‘antibody-drug conjugate’, ‘immunotherapy’, and ‘plus bevacizumab’. Cluster 3 (represented in dark blue) primarily encompasses studies on PARP inhibitor maintenance therapy, illustrated by terms like ‘niraparib maintenance therapy’ and ‘olaparib plus bevacizumab’. Cluster 4 (represented in yellow) investigates germline BRCA1/2 mutations, featuring keywords such as ‘brca1/2’, ‘mutation carriers’, and ‘next generation sequencing’. Cluster 5 (represented in purple) explores the application of PARP inhibitors in other cancer types, with examples including ‘cell lung-cancer’, ‘metastatic breast-cancer’, ‘pancreatic cancer’, and ‘solid tumors’. Cluster 6 (represented in light blue) emphasizes research on mechanisms related to anti-angiogenic targeted drugs, highlighted by keywords like ‘cediranib’ and ‘down-regulation’. Temporal and Conceptual Evolution: The time-overlapping analysis (Fig. 5B) revealed a clear knowledge progression: early research (purple nodes) emphasized foundational mechanisms like “somatic mutations” and “tumor microenvironment,” while recent work (yellow nodes) pivoted toward clinical translation, including “maintenance therapy” and “nonplatinum chemotherapy.” Critically, Cluster 1 (resistance mechanisms) underpins clinical challenges in Cluster 3 (maintenance therapy). This link is exemplified by the SOLO1 trial’s 7-year OS data [19], where long-term maintenance benefits are intrinsically limited by acquired resistance—demonstrating how mechanistic insights (Cluster 1) directly inform therapeutic optimization (Cluster 3).

Fig. 5.

Analysis of research hotspots in PARP inhibitors for ovarian cancer using VOSviewer, CiteSpace, and Excel. In (A) and (B), the size of the nodes represents the frequency of keyword occurrence, and the thickness of the lines indicates the strength of connections between them A keyword co-occurrence network; B time-overlapping co-occurrence analysis network of keywords; C a list of the 20 most frequently used keywords; D the 12 keywords with the strongest citation bursts)

Frequency analysis (Fig. 5C) confirmed “ovarian cancer” (N = 825), “PARP inhibitors” (N = 633), and “olaparib” (N = 376) as dominant keywords, reinforcing the centrality of PARPi clinical deployment.

Analysis of keywords bursts

Figure 5D displays the top 12 keywords with citation bursts lasting at least one year. Currently, four keywords are still experiencing ongoing citation bursts, with ‘platinum-based chemotherapy’ exhibiting the strongest burst strength (2.67). This is closely followed by keywords such as ‘efficacy’, ‘brca2 protein’, and ‘management’. This suggests that future research may focus on these keywords.

Discussion

This bibliometric analysis offers a structured overview of the global research landscape on PARP inhibitors in ovarian cancer from 2021–May 2025. Our findings reveal several critical insights into the evolution and current priorities of this field.

PARP inhibitor resistance as the central research focus

Keyword cluster analysis (Fig. 5A) establishes PARP inhibitor resistance as the predominant research focus in this domain, reflecting its critical clinical implications. Despite significant improvements in progression-free survival (PFS) with PARP inhibition, 40–60% of initial responders develop acquired resistance leading to therapeutic failur. This persistent challenge is substantiated by high-impact literature: Dias et al.‘s [29] seminal review established core resistance mechanisms while proposing DNA damage response-targeting combination strategies. The sustained academic relevance is further evidenced by the SOLO1 trial’s 7-year overall survival (OS) data [19], demonstrating the strongest citation burst (strength = 23.99) – validating long-term benefits while highlighting the imperative for next-generation resistance-mitigating therapies.

Geopolitical dynamics in research collaboration

Analysis of global collaboration reveals distinct geographical patterns shaping the field. The United States (440 publications) maintains research leadership through robust European partnerships, particularly with the United Kingdom (collaboration frequency: 47) and Italy (collaboration frequency: 53), forming a dominant Euro-American core group that drives multinational trial consortia. While China ranks second in productivity (352 publications), its international engagement remains limited (< 20 co-publications with major partners), though it anchors an emerging East Asian growth hub alongside Japan and South Korea. Institutionally, Euro-American dominance persists through UNICANCER (France) and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (USA), facilitated by industry-academic alliances. The emergent activity of Japanese institutions signifies a shift toward multipolar research networks, where complementary expertise across these geographic clusters—mechanistic innovation (Euro-America) and rapid clinical translation (East Asia)—could accelerate solutions for shared challenges like resistance mechanisms.

Temporal evolution from basic mechanisms to clinical translation

Temporal keyword evolution demonstrates a maturation trajectory in the research continuum. Early investigations emphasized fundamental mechanisms including somatic mutations and tumor microenvironment dynamics, whereas recent studies prioritize clinical implementation challenges such as maintenance therapy optimization and non-platinum chemotherapy approaches. This progression reflects deepening integration between discovery and application: BRCA1/2 and homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) testing now directly inform therapeutic stratification, while clinical obstacles like platinum resistance (burst strength = 2.67) drive basic research toward next-generation inhibitors with enhanced safety profiles and efficacy.

Practical implications for stakeholders

This bibliometric mapping yields actionable intelligence for diverse stakeholder groups. Researchers should prioritize resistance mechanisms and combination strategies (e.g., immuno-PARPi regimens) as high-yield investigative pathways to overcome current therapeutic plateaus. Notably, despite the clinical promise of immuno-targeted combinations (e.g., PARPi plus immune checkpoint inhibitors), our keyword analysis revealed limited coverage of these strategies (Cluster 2 frequency: 4.8% of total keywords), highlighting a critical translational gap. Funding agencies may leverage transnational collaboration networks to identify strategic partnership opportunities, particularly targeting underdeveloped research connections such as bridging the Euro-American core and East Asian hubs through structured China-EU/US consortia. For clinicians, the observed thematic shift toward maintenance therapy provides evidence-based guidance for treatment sequencing decisions, especially in platinum-resistant cases where novel non-platinum combinations—though emergent—require expanded investigation to address resistance-driven relapse.

Methodological considerations and limitations

Several methodological constraints warrant careful interpretation of findings. The exclusive reliance on Web of Science Core Collection data introduces potential database-specific selection biases, while exclusion of non-English publications may overlook significant contributions from non-Anglophone regions. Citation metrics for recent publications likely underestimate long-term academic impact due to shorter citation windows. Quantitative analysis of collaboration networks cannot capture qualitative dimensions of partnership depth or resource allocation. Partial coverage of 2025 publications represents an additional temporal limitation affecting trend extrapolation. This study fundamentally characterizes research activity through publication patterns, which precludes direct assessment of therapeutic efficacy. While we identify hotspots like “combination therapy” (Cluster 2) and “drug resistance” (Cluster 1), our methodology cannot differentiate clinical outcomes across specific PARP inhibitors (e.g., olaparib vs. niraparib) or combination regimens (e.g., PARPi + bevacizumab vs. PARPi + immune checkpoint inhibitors). Such evaluations require individual patient-level meta-analyses or prospective trials. Therapeutic efficacy remains the ultimate benchmark for translational success. The conspicuous citation bursts surrounding clinical milestones—most notably the SOLO1 trial’s 7-year OS data [28] (burst strength = 23.99)—underscore the scientific community’s prioritization of survival outcomes. Thus, while our study delineates knowledge infrastructure, the urgent clinical imperative lies in resolving efficacy gaps identified herein, particularly the underrepresentation of immuno-combination strategies (4.8% keyword frequency) and differential outcomes across PARPi agents. Future efficacy syntheses should leverage this bibliometric roadmap to target high-impact comparative studies.

Author contributions

W.X.D: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Methodology, Software, Writing – original draft.D.G.P: Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Validation, Visualization, Writing – original draft.H.J: Investigation, Resources, Validation, Writing – review & editing.H.Y.P: Resources, Validation, Writing – review & editing.W.Q.Q: Conceptualization, Project administration, Supervision, Writing – review & editing.

Funding

None.

Data availability

Data are available upon reasonable request contacting the corresponding author.

Declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.