Delaying the primary surgical effort for advanced ovarian cancer: A systematic review of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and interval cytoreduction

2007 ◽  
Vol 104 (2) ◽  
pp. 480-490 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert E. Bristow ◽  
Eric L. Eisenhauer ◽  
Antonio Santillan ◽  
Dennis S. Chi
2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e16553-e16553 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cindy Alcarraz ◽  
Mivael Olivera ◽  
Johana Muñiz ◽  
Zaida Morante ◽  
Rossana Ruiz ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (8) ◽  
pp. 1285-1291 ◽  
Author(s):  
Satyam Kumar ◽  
Joanna Long ◽  
Sean Kehoe ◽  
Sudha Sundar ◽  
Carole Cummins

BackgroundQuality of life after ovarian cancer treatment is an important goal for patients. Complex debulking surgeries and platinum based chemotherapy are often required but quality of life after surgery is rarely reported.ObjectivesTo describe quality of life outcomes after surgery for advanced ovarian cancer in a systematic review and meta-analysis.Search strategyMEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL through March 2019 with no language restrictions.Selection criteriaIncluded studies reported quality of life in women diagnosed with primary advanced ovarian cancer, fallopian tube carcinoma or primary peritoneal cancer undergoing cytoreduction surgery.Data collection and analysisData on extent and timing of surgery, quality of life outcomes, and surgical complications were extracted and study quality assessed.ResultsThree randomized controlled trials comparing primary surgery to neoadjuvant chemotherapy had heterogeneous quality of life outcomes with no difference between arms, although there was a clinical improvement in global quality of life scores in both arms at 6 months compared with baseline. Data from two observational studies showed no meaningful difference in quality of life scores between patients undergoing standard or extensive surgery at 6 months.ConclusionsThere was no clinically important difference in the quality of life of patients undergoing either primary debulking surgery or neoadjuvant chemotherapy. There is insufficient evidence on quality of life outcomes of patients undergoing extensive or ultra-radical surgery compared with those undergoing less extensive surgery. Quality of life outcomes matter to patients, but there is little evidence to inform patient choice regarding the extent of surgery.


2014 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 682-686 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ritu Salani ◽  
David M. O’Malley ◽  
Larry J. Copeland ◽  
David E. Cohn ◽  
Floor J. Backes ◽  
...  

ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to determine a dosing schedule of neoadjuvant chemotherapy using carboplatin, paclitaxel, and bevacizumab in women with advanced ovarian cancer, evaluating feasibility and outcomes from interval cytoreductive surgery (ICS).MethodsUsing a “3+3” design, eligible patients received carboplatin (area under the curve, 5) and bevacizumab (15 mg/kg) every 3 weeks with escalating doses of weekly paclitaxel (60, 70, and 80 mg/m2) for 3 cycles. Patients then received 1 cycle of chemotherapy without bevacizumab followed by ICS. The primary objective was to determine a feasible dosing schedule. Secondary objectives included defining toxicity, response rates based on imaging, and surgical outcomes defined by residual disease following ICS and 30-day postoperative outcomes.ResultsNine patients were enrolled with a median age of 64 years. There were no dose-limiting toxicities, and weekly paclitaxel 80 mg/m2was deemed feasible. During chemotherapy treatment, there were a total of 7 attributable grade 3 toxicities, which most commonly included neutropenia and thromboembolism. All patients demonstrated a response on imaging before surgery, with a median reduction in disease of 56.4% (range, 36.9%–100%). Optimal ICS was performed in all patients, and 78% had no gross residual tumor. There were no intraoperative complications; however, 1 patient experienced an anastomotic leak (grade 4) 10 days after surgery requiring repeat operation.ConclusionsA 4-cycle neoadjuvant regimen of carboplatin area under the curve of 5, weekly paclitaxel 80 mg/m2, and bevacizumab 15 mg/kg for cycles 1 to 3, followed by interval cytoreduction, was feasible. Optimal ICS was achieved in all patients, and surgery was associated with acceptable morbidity.


2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (9) ◽  
pp. 1341-1347 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeremie Abitbol ◽  
Walter Gotlieb ◽  
Ziggy Zeng ◽  
Agnihotram Ramanakumar ◽  
Roy Kessous ◽  
...  

IntroductionWith the rapid uptake of robotic surgery in surgical oncology, its use in the treatment of epithelial ovarian cancers is being evaluated. Complete cytoreduction represents the goal of surgery either at primary cytoreduction or after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in the setting of interval cytoreduction. In selected patients, the extent of disease would enable minimally invasive surgery. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of introducing robotic surgery for interval cytoreduction of selected patients with stage III–IV ovarian cancer.MethodsAll patients who underwent surgery from November 2008 to 2014 (concurrent time period when robotic and open surgery were used simultaneously) after receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy for advanced ovarian cancer (stage III–IV) were compared with all consecutive patients who underwent cytoreductive surgery by laparotomy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy between January 2006 and November 2008. Inclusion criteria included an interval cytoreductive surgery by laparotomy or robotic assistance for stage III–IV non-mucinous epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer. Exclusion criteria included patients treated concurrently for a non-gynecologic cancer, as well as secondary cytoreductive surgeries and diagnostic surgeries without an attempt at tumor reduction. Overall survival, progression-free survival, and peri-operative outcomes were compared for the entire patient cohort with those with advanced ovarian cancer who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy immediately before and after the introduction of robotic surgery.ResultsA total of 91 patients were selected to undergo interval cytoreduction either via robotic surgery (n=57) or laparotomy (n=34) after the administration of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The median age of the cohort was 65 years (range 24–88), 78% had stage III disease, and the median follow-up time was 37 months (5.6–91.4 months). The median survival was 42.8±3.1 months in the period where both robotic surgery and laparotomy were offered compared with 37.9±9.8 months in the time period preceding when only laparotomy was performed (p=0.6). All patients selected to undergo interval robotic cytoreduction following neoadjuvant chemotherapy had a reduction of cancer antigen 125 by at least 80%, resolution of ascites, and CT findings suggesting the potential to achieve optimal interval cytoreduction. All these patients achieved optimal cytoreduction with <1 cm residual disease, including 82% with no residual disease. The median blood loss was 100 mL (mean 135 mL, range 10–1250 mL), and the median hospital stay was 1 day.ConclusionRobotic interval cytoreductive surgery is feasible in well-selected patients. Future studies should aim to define ideal patients for minimally invasive cytoreductive surgery.


2019 ◽  
Vol 153 (2) ◽  
pp. 445-451 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Timmermans ◽  
O. van der Hel ◽  
G.S. Sonke ◽  
K.K. Van de Vijver ◽  
M.A. van der Aa ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document