Primary Surgery or Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Advanced Ovarian Cancer: The Debate Continues…

2016 ◽  
pp. 153-162 ◽  
Author(s):  
Renee Cowan ◽  
Dennis Chi ◽  
Sean Kehoe ◽  
Matthew Nankivell ◽  
Alexandra Leary
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy ◽  
Residual Disease ◽  
Tumor Biology ◽  
Advanced Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Debulking Surgery ◽  
Primary Debulking Surgery ◽  
Platinum Based Chemotherapy ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
The Impact

Primary debulking surgery (PDS) followed by platinum-based chemotherapy has been the cornerstone of treatment for advanced ovarian cancer for decades. Primary debulking surgery has been repeatedly identified as one of the key factors in improving survival in patients with advanced ovarian cancer, especially when minimal or no residual disease is left behind. Achieving these results sometimes requires extensive abdominal and pelvic surgical procedures and consultation with other surgical teams. Some clinicians who propose a primary chemotherapy approach reported an increased likelihood of leaving no macroscopic disease after surgery and improved patient-reported outcomes and quality-of-life (QOL) measures. Given the ongoing debate regarding the relative benefit of PDS versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT), tumor biology may aid in patient selection for each approach. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy offers the opportunity for in vivo chemosensitivity testing. Studies are needed to determine the best way to evaluate the impact of NACT in each individual patient with advanced ovarian cancer. Indeed, the biggest utility of NACT may be in research, where this approach provides the opportunity for the investigation of predictive markers, mechanisms of resistance, and a forum to test novel therapies.

scholarly journals Simulated Costs of the ASCO Patient-Centered Oncology Payment Model in Medicare Beneficiaries With Newly Diagnosed Advanced Ovarian Cancer

2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (12) ◽  
pp. e1018-e1027 ◽  
Author(s):  
Haley A. Moss ◽  
Laura J. Havrilesky ◽  
Frances F. Wang ◽  
Mihaela V. Georgieva ◽  
Laura H. Hendrix ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy ◽  
Advanced Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Cost Savings ◽  
Emergency Department Visits ◽  
Medicare Beneficiaries ◽  
Debulking Surgery ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Primary Debulking Surgery ◽  
The Impact

PURPOSE: Efforts to curb the rising costs of cancer care while improving quality include alternative payment models (APMs), which offer incentives to reduce avoidable spending and provide high-quality and cost-efficient care. The impact of proposed APMs has not been quantified in real-world practice. In this study, we evaluated ASCO’s Patient-Centered Oncology Payment (PCOP) model in existing fee-for-service (FFS) Medicare beneficiaries to understand the magnitude of potential cost savings. MATERIALS AND METHODS: SEER-Medicare data were used to identify women with advanced ovarian cancer diagnosed between 2000 and 2012 who either (1) underwent primary debulking surgery followed by chemotherapy or (2) received neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery. Medicare payments in each cohort were used to compare FFS and PCOP and to estimate the potential for cost savings across health care services received, including outpatient emergency department visits, hospitalizations, and imaging. RESULTS: Three thousand seven hundred seventy-seven primary debulking surgery and 866 neoadjuvant chemotherapy patients were included in the study, with mean total costs of $75,433 and $95,138 in 2016 US$, respectively Most costs were related to chemotherapy or hospitalization. Additional PCOP-related payments would be offset if hospitalizations could be reduced by 11.6% or imaging claims by 88%. CONCLUSION: APMs have the potential to reduce costs of current FFS reimbursement via either a large reduction in imaging or a modest reduction in hospitalizations during treatment of ovarian cancer. PCOP is a reasonable payment structure for oncologists if the additional payments can provide the necessary resources to invest in improved coordination of care.

scholarly journals Laparoscopic Debulking Surgery in the Management of Advanced Ovarian Cancer After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy

2015 ◽  
Vol 25 (7) ◽  
pp. 1253-1257 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giacomo Corrado ◽  
Emanuela Mancini ◽  
Giuseppe Cutillo ◽  
Ermelinda Baiocco ◽  
Patrizia Vici ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy ◽  
Residual Disease ◽  
Operating Time ◽  
Laparoscopic Approach ◽  
Advanced Ovarian Cancer ◽  
High Morbidity ◽  
Debulking Surgery ◽  
Intraoperative Complication ◽  
The Impact

ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and morbidity of total laparoscopic debulking surgery in the treatment of advanced ovarian cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy.Methods/MaterialsWe performed a retrospective review of laparoscopic approach in patients with histologically confirmed epithelial ovarian cancer (International Federation of GynaecologyObstetrics stages IIIC-IV) who received 3 courses of neoadjuvant chemotherapy, from January 2010 to December 2014, at the Gynaecologic Oncologic Unit, “Regina Elena” National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy.ResultsA total of 30 patients were included. The median age was 50 years (range, 26–73 years), median body mass index was 24.5 kg/m2 (range, 19–39 kg/m2). All patients had good clinical response to 3 cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. All women underwent a complete debulking surgery with no residual disease. The median operating time was 152 minutes (range, 70–335 minutes), the median blood loss was 70 mL (range, 50–200 mL). The median number of removed pelvic lymph nodes was 15 (range, 13–25). There was 1 (3.3%) intraoperative complication and 2 (6.6%) postoperative short-term complications. The median length of hospital stay was 4 days (range, 3–13 days). The median follow-up was 15 months (range, 2–54 months). Twenty-six patients are free from recurrence at the time of this report.ConclusionsLaparoscopic cytoreduction in patients with advanced ovarian cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy, when performed by skilled surgeons, seems feasible and may decrease the impact of aggressive surgery on high-morbidity patients, such as on women after chemotherapy.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in advanced ovarian cancer: a case-control study

2005 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 217-223 ◽  
Author(s):  
V. Loizzi ◽  
G. Cormio ◽  
L. Resta ◽  
C. A. Rossi ◽  
A. R. Di Gilio ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy ◽  
Ovarian Carcinoma ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Disease Free Survival ◽  
Epithelial Ovarian Carcinoma ◽  
Advanced Stage ◽  
Debulking Surgery ◽  
Primary Debulking Surgery ◽  
Platinum Based Chemotherapy

The aim of this study was to compare the outcome of patients with advanced ovarian carcinoma treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) with those treated conventionally with primary debulking surgery. From 1994 to 2003, all consecutive cases of advanced-stage epithelial ovarian carcinoma treated with NACT at the University of Bari were identified. A well-balanced group of women who underwent primary debulking surgery followed by platinum-based chemotherapy was selected as controls. Kaplan–Meier and Cox proportional hazards analyses were used to determine the predictors for survival. Thirty women with advanced-stage epithelial ovarian carcinoma were treated with NACT and compared to 30 patients who underwent primary debulking surgery. Patients in the NACT were significantly older and had a poorer performance status compared to the controls. However, no statistical difference was observed in overall disease-specific survival (P = 0.66) and disease-free survival (P = 0.25) between the two groups. Although patients in the NACT group are significantly older and have a poorer performance status, this treatment modality does not compromise survival. Prospective randomized trials comparing NACT to conventional treatment to determine the quality of life and cost/benefit outcomes are now appropriate for women presenting advanced epithelial ovarian cancer.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with six cycles of carboplatin and paclitaxel in advanced ovarian cancer patients not candidates for optimal primary surgery: Safety and effectivenes.

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 5540-5540
Author(s):  
Vanessa Costa Miranda ◽  
Angelo Bezerra de Sousa Fede ◽  
Carlos Henrique Dos Anjos ◽  
Juliana Ribeiro da Silva ◽  
Fernando Barbosa Sanchez ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy ◽  
Disease Progression ◽  
Advanced Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Length Of Hospital Stay ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Debulking Surgery ◽  
Stage Iiic ◽  
Primary Debulking Surgery

5540 Background: Primary debulking surgery (PDS) has been considered the standard of treatment in advanced ovarian cancer, while neoadjuvant chemotherapy, three cycles followed by interval debulking (ID) surgery, is a valid treatment alternative for patients with non-resectable disease. This study aimed to show the efficacy and safety of six cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (N-CT) followed by cytoreduction, a single institution experience. Methods: Aretrospective analysis was performed of all patients (pts) with advanced ovarian cancer treated with platinum based N-CT, between January/2004 and February/2012. Results: 97 pts underwent N-CT in our institution; 78.1% and 18.8% the patients had extensive stage IIIC or IV disease at diagnosis, respectively. Median age 60 years (36 – 82). Histologic types: serous 84.5%, adenocarcinoma not specified 11.3%, endometrioide 1.0%. A median of six cycles of chemotherapy were performed. Patients did not received chemotherapy after debulking surgery. During the treatment 31.4% had grade 3/4 toxicity, the most commonly observed toxicities were hematologic toxicities and nausea, four (4.1%) patients died during chemotherapy due to disease progression. After N-CT 24.7% achieved clinical complete response, 57.7% partial response and 12.4% disease progression. From this cohort 63.1% underwent a complete resection of all macroscopic and microscopic disease (R0). Median length of hospital stay and postoperative ICU stay was 5 and 0.8 days respectively, surgical complications were not common however five (7.1%) patients needed second surgery due to operatory complications and 19 pts (27.1%) needed blood transfusion after debulking. With a median follow up of 21.8 months (0.5-139.7), median overall survival and chemotherapy-free interval were 57,7 and 9,5 months, respectively. Conclusions: Six cycles of neoadjuvant carboplatin and paclitaxel is safe, effective and does not increase perioperative and postoperative complications for patients with stage IIIC-IV not candidates for optimal/R0 PDS. The overall survival of this cohort is higher than those treated with interval debulking surgery.

scholarly journals Role of Lymphadenectomy During Interval Debulking Surgery Performed After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Patients With Advanced Ovarian Cancer

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Minjun He ◽  
Yuerong Lai ◽  
Hongyu Peng ◽  
Chongjie Tong
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy ◽  
Residual Disease ◽  
Advanced Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Debulking Surgery ◽  
Hazard Ratios ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Interval Debulking Surgery

ObjectiveThe role of lymphadenectomy in interval debulking surgery (IDS) performed after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) in advanced ovarian cancer remains unclear. We aimed to investigate the clinical significance of lymphadenectomy in IDS.MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed and analyzed the data of patients with advanced ovarian cancer who underwent NACT followed by IDS.ResultsIn 303 patients receiving NACT-IDS, lymphadenectomy was performed in 127 (41.9%) patients. One hundred and sixty-three (53.8%) patients achieved no gross residual disease (NGRD), and 69 (22.8%) had residual disease < 1 cm, whereas 71 (23.4%) had residual disease ≥ 1cm. No significant difference in progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) was observed between the lymphadenectomy group and the no lymphadenectomy group in patients with NGRD, residual disease < 1 cm, and residual disease ≥ 1 cm, respectively. The proportions of pelvic, para-aortic and distant lymph node recurrence were 7.9% (10/127), 4.7% (6/127) and 5.5% (7/127) in the lymphadenectomy group, compared with 5.7% (10/176, P = 0.448), 4.5% (8/176, P = 0.942) and 5.1% (9/176, P = 0.878), respectively, in no lymphadenectomy group. Multivariate analysis identified residual disease ≥ 1 cm [hazard ratios (HR), 4.094; P = 0.008] and elevated CA125 levels after 3 cycles of adjuvant chemotherapy (HR, 2.883; P = 0.004) were negative predictors for OS.ConclusionLymphadenectomy may have no therapeutic value in patients with advanced ovarian cancer underwent NACT-IDS. Our findings may help to better the therapeutic strategy for advanced ovarian cancer. More clinical trials are warranted to further clarify the real role of lymphadenectomy in IDS.

Primary debulking surgery (PDS) for stage IIIc ovarian cancer: Quo vadis?

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e15568-e15568
Author(s):  
Leslie A. Garrett ◽  
Whitfield Board Growdon ◽  
David M. Boruta ◽  
Marcela G del Carmen ◽  
Anna M. Priebe ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Residual Disease ◽  
Tumor Biology ◽  
Advanced Ovarian Cancer ◽  
High Volume ◽  
Tumor Board ◽  
Debulking Surgery ◽  
Stage Iiic ◽  
En Bloc ◽  
Quo Vadis

e15568 Background: The efficacy of PDS for advanced ovarian cancer has recently been challenged by data suggesting equivalent clinical outcomes for neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) and interval debulking surgery (IDS). The strongest known predictor of prolonged survival in either group is the ability to achieve complete resection (CR) to no residual disease. PDS that results in a CR is associated with the longest overall survival of any sequence of treatment. The aim of this study was to determine what type of surgical approach is required to successfully perform PDS. Methods: All women with newly diagnosed stage IIIC epithelial ovarian carcinoma treated at our institution from 2000 to 2010 were identified. Pathology was prospectively reviewed by a faculty gynecologic pathologist. Treatment planning was discussed and documented at our weekly multidisciplinary tumor board conference. Data was retrospectively extracted from computerized medical records. Results: 344 (86%) of 401 women underwent PDS. Optimal debulking was achieved in 278 patients (81%): 35% had CR while 46% had 0.1-1.0 cm residual disease. 56 stage IIIC pts (19%) had a suboptimal surgical outcome with ≥ 1.0 cm. Compared to those having a CR, patients with 0.1-1.0 cm residual were more likely to require splenectomy (17 v 5%; P = 0.002) and transverse colectomy (19 v 10%; P = 0.042), with comparable rates of rectosigmoid resection (41 v 39%; P = 0.712) and en bloc pelvic resection including total peritonectomy (26 v 30%; P = 0.050). Patients undergoing CR were more likely to have diaphragmatic surgery (31 v 20; P = 0.068) and lymphadenectomy (67 v 33%; P < 0.001). Conclusions: PDS is the preferred treatment of stage IIIC epithelial ovarian cancer at high-volume centers demonstrating >75% rates of optimal cytoreduction. Tumor biology may lead to the need for more aggressive upper abdominal procedures in patients with 0.1-1.0 residual. Diaphragm resection, stripping or ablation is more often required in order to achieve CR. Since subclinical macroscopic nodal metastases are often present, lymphadenectomy is also frequently performed to ensure that all possible disease has been resected.

scholarly journals Comparison of Platinum-based Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy and Primary Debulking Surgery in Patients with Advanced Ovarian Cancer

2013 ◽  
Vol 63 (6) ◽  
pp. 405-409 ◽  
Author(s):  
Manizheh Sayyah-Melli ◽  
Gita Kashi Zonoozi ◽  
Shahryar Hashemzadeh ◽  
Ali Esfahani ◽  
Elaheh Ouladehsahebmadarek ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy ◽  
Advanced Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Debulking Surgery ◽  
Primary Debulking Surgery

scholarly journals Clinical significance of primary debulking surgery and neoadjuvant chemotherapy-interval debulking surgery in advanced ovarian cancer

2020 ◽  
Vol 50 (4) ◽  
pp. 379-386
Author(s):  
Shin Nishio ◽  
Kimio Ushijima
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy ◽  
Clinical Significance ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Advanced Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Stage Iii ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
Debulking Surgery ◽  
Primary Debulking Surgery ◽  
Interval Debulking Surgery

Abstract Primary debulking surgery followed by platinum-based chemotherapy remains the standard treatment of patients with stage III–IV epithelial ovarian cancer. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy is an alternative treatment regimen that can be considered in selected patients. Complete cytoreduction, both through primary debulking surgery and interval debulking surgery, has a major positive effect on survival and should be the goal, even if this requires extensive surgery. When thorough assessment of tumor spread and performance status of the patient indicates that complete primary cytoreduction is not feasible without unacceptable morbidity, then alternative therapeutic strategies, such as neoadjuvant chemotherapy, must be considered. Such patients can be offered the option of interval debulking surgery after checking their response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy and resolution of the initial obstacles for primary debulking surgery (i.e. complete response of irresectable disease and improvement of the performance status). Current evidence suggests that a selected group of patients with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage III–IV ovarian cancer will benefit from NAC-IDS. Research is ongoing to identify patients who might derive the greatest benefit from neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by interval debulking surgery, instead of primary debulking surgery, on the basis of radiological, genetic, pathological, and immunological variables. In this review, we discuss current knowledge about the clinical significance of primary debulking surgery and neoadjuvant chemotherapy in advanced ovarian cancer and discuss unanswered questions in the field.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document