scholarly journals Rethinking Radical Surgery in Interval Debulking Surgery for Advanced-Stage Ovarian Cancer Patients Undergoing Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 1235 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yong Jae Lee ◽  
Jung-Yun Lee ◽  
Eun Ji Nam ◽  
Sang Wun Kim ◽  
Sunghoon Kim ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Disease Burden ◽  
Residual Disease ◽  
Advanced Stage ◽  
Debulking Surgery ◽  
Cox Regression Analysis ◽  
Interval Debulking Surgery ◽  
Surgical Complexity

The aim of this study is to evaluate the effects on survival outcomes of the disease burden before interval debulking surgery (IDS), surgical complexity, and residual disease after IDS in advanced-stage ovarian cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC). We reviewed the data of 268 epithelial ovarian cancer patients who had received three or four cycles of NAC and undergone optimal resections through IDS. The Kaplan–Meier method and Cox regression analysis were used to assess the effects of disease burden (peritoneal cancer index (PCI)), degree of complexity of surgery (surgical complexity score/s (SCS)), and extent of residual disease. In no residual disease (R0) patients, those with intermediate/high SCS had shorter progression-free survival (PFS; p = 0.001) and overall survival (OS; p = 0.001) than patients with low SCS. An analysis of a subset of patients with R0 and low PCIs showed those with intermediate/high SCS had worse PFS and OS than patients with low SCS (p = 0.049) and OS (p = 0.037). In multivariate analysis, patients with R0 as a result of intermediate/high SCS fared worse than patients whose R0 was achieved by low SCS (PFS hazard ratio (HR) 1.80, 95% CI 1.05–3.10; OS HR 5.59, 95% CI 1.70–18.39). High PCIs at the time of IDS, high SCS, and residual disease signal poor prognoses for patients treated with NAC.

scholarly journals SOX2 is a promising predictor of relapse and death in advanced stage high-grade serous ovarian cancer patients with residual disease after debulking surgery

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (6) ◽  
pp. 1805094
Author(s):  
Maria Bååth ◽  
Sofia Westbom-Fremer ◽  
Laura Martin de la Fuente ◽  
Anna Ebbesson ◽  
Juliette Davis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Residual Disease ◽  
High Grade ◽  
Advanced Stage ◽  
Serous Ovarian Cancer ◽  
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.

A Comparison of Survival Outcomes in Advanced Serous Ovarian Cancer Patients Treated With Primary Debulking Surgery Versus Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy

2017 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 668-674 ◽  
Author(s):  
Taymaa May ◽  
Robyn Comeau ◽  
Ping Sun ◽  
Joanne Kotsopoulos ◽  
Steven A. Narod ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Residual Disease ◽  
Survival Outcomes ◽  
Serous Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Debulking Surgery ◽  
Cancer Specific Survival ◽  
Primary Debulking Surgery

ObjectiveThe management of women with advanced-stage serous ovarian cancer includes a combination of surgery and chemotherapy. The choice of treatment with primary debulking surgery or neoadjuvant chemotherapy varies by institution. The objective of this study was to report 5-year survival outcomes for ovarian cancer patients treated at a single institution with primary debulking surgery or neoadjuvant chemotherapy.MethodsThis study included a retrospective chart review of 303 patients with stage IIIC or IV serous ovarian carcinoma diagnosed in Calgary, Canada. The patients were categorized into 1 of the 2 treatment arms: primary debulking surgery or neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The 5-year ovarian cancer–specific survival rates were estimated using Kaplan-Meier curves.ResultsAmong the 303 eligible patients, 142 patients (47%) underwent primary debulking surgery, and 161 patients (53%) were treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Five-year survival was better for patients undergoing primary debulking surgery (39%) than for patients who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy (27%; P = 0.02). Women with no residual disease experienced better overall survival than those with any residual disease (47% vs. 26%, respectively; P = 0.0002). This difference was significant for those who had primary debulking surgery (P = 0.0004) but not for the patients who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy (P = 0.09). Women who received intraperitoneal chemotherapy had better overall survival as compared with patients who received intravenous chemotherapy (44% vs 30%, respectively; P = 0.002).ConclusionsOur findings suggest that among women with no residual disease, survival is better among those who undergo primary debulking surgery than treatment with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The latter should be reserved for women who are deemed not to be candidates for primary debulking surgery.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document