A prospective comparison of perioperative morbidity in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer: Primary versus interval cytoreduction - experience from India

Abstract Objectives: The objective was to compare perioperative morbidity and mortality of patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) treated with either of the two treatment approaches; neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) followed by interval debulking versus upfront surgery. Design: Prospective comparative observational study. Participants: In total, 51 patients were included in the study. All patients with diagnosed advanced EOC (International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics IIIC and IV) presenting for the 1st time were included in the study. Interventions: Patients were either operated upfront (n = 19) if deemed operable or were subjected to NACT followed by interval debulking (n = 32). Primary and Secondary Outcomes: Intra- and postoperative morbidity and mortality were the primary outcome measures. Results: Patients with interval cytoreduction were noted to have significantly lesser operative time, blood loss, and extent of surgery. Their discharge time was also significantly earlier. However, they did not differ from the other group vis. a vis. postoperative complications or mortality. Conclusions: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy although has a positive impact on various intraoperative adverse events, fails to show any impact on immediate postoperative negative outcomes.

Download Full-text

Survival outcomes after delayed cytoreduction surgery following neoadjuvant chemotherapy in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer

International Journal of Gynecological Cancer ◽

10.1136/ijgc-2020-001658 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 30 (12) ◽

pp. 1935-1942

Author(s):

Shih-Ern Yao ◽

Lee Tripcony ◽

Karen Sanday ◽

Jessica Robertson ◽

Lewis Perrin ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Ovarian Cancer ◽

Overall Survival ◽

Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy ◽

Epithelial Ovarian Cancer ◽

Cancer Patients ◽

Residual Disease ◽

Complete Cytoreduction ◽

Survival Outcomes ◽

Advanced Epithelial Ovarian Cancer ◽

Interval Cytoreduction

ObjectiveInterval cytoreduction following neoadjuvant chemotherapy is a well-recognized treatment alternative to primary debulking surgery in the treatment of advanced epithelial ovarian cancer where patient and/or disease factors prevent complete macroscopic disease resection to be achieved. More recently, the strain of the global COVID-19 pandemic on hospital resources has forced many units to alter the timing of interval surgery and extend the number of neoadjuvant chemotherapy cycles. In order to support this paradigm shift and provide more accurate counseling during these unprecedented times, we investigated the survival outcomes in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer patients with the intent of maximal cytoreduction following neoadjuvant chemotherapy with respect to timing of surgery and degree of cytoreduction.MethodsA retrospective review of all patients aged 18 years and above with FIGO (2014) stage III/IV epithelial ovarian cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and the intention of interval cytoreduction surgery between January 2008 and December 2017 was conducted. Overall and progression-free survival outcomes were analyzed and compared with patients who only received chemotherapy. Outcome measures were correlated with the number of neoadjuvant chemotherapy cycles and amount of residual disease following surgery.ResultsSix hundred and seventy-one patients (median age 67 (range 20–91) years) were included in the study with 572 patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and surgery and 99 patients with chemotherapy only. There was no difference in the proportion of patients in whom complete cytoreduction was achieved based on number of cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (2–4 cycles: 67.7%, n=337/498); ≥5 cycles: 62.2%, n=46/74). Patients undergoing cytoreduction surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy had a median 5-year progression-free and overall survival of 24 and 38 months, respectively. No significant difference in overall survival between surgical groups was observed (interval cytoreduction: 41 months vs delayed cytoreduction: 43 months, p=0.52). Those who achieved complete cytoreduction to R0 (no macroscopic disease) had a significant median overall survival advantage compared with those with any macroscopic residual disease (R0: 49–51 months vs R<1: 22–39 months, p<0.001 vs R≥1: 23–26 months, p<0.001).ConclusionsSurvival outcomes do not appear to be worse for patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy if cytoreduction surgery is delayed beyond three cycles. In advanced epithelial ovarian cancer patients the imperative to achieve complete surgical cytoreduction remains gold standard, irrespective of surgical timing, for best survival benefit.

Download Full-text

Clinical Impact of Lymphadenectomy after Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Advanced Epithelial Ovarian Cancer: A Review of Available Data

Journal of Clinical Medicine ◽

10.3390/jcm10020334 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 10 (2) ◽

pp. 334

Author(s):

Stephanie Seidler ◽

Meriem Koual ◽

Guillaume Achen ◽

Enrica Bentivegna ◽

Laure Fournier ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Ovarian Cancer ◽

Lymph Node ◽

Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy ◽

Epithelial Ovarian Cancer ◽

Lymph Node Dissection ◽

Prospective Trial ◽

Node Dissection ◽

Advanced Epithelial Ovarian Cancer ◽

The Impact ◽

Systematic Lymph Node Dissection

Recent robust data allow for omitting lymph node dissection for patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) and without any suspicion of lymph node metastases, without compromising recurrence-free survival (RFS), nor overall survival (OS), in the setting of primary surgical treatment. Evidence supporting the same postulate for patients undergoing complete cytoreductive surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) is lacking. Throughout a systematic literature review, the aim of our study was to evaluate the impact of lymph node dissection in patients undergoing surgery for advanced-stage EOC after NACT. A total of 1094 patients, included in six retrospective series, underwent either systematic, selective or no lymph node dissection. Only one study reveals a positive effect of lymphadenectomy on OS, and two on RFS. The four remaining series fail to demonstrate any beneficial effect on survival, neither for RFS nor OS. All of them highlight the higher peri- and post-operative complication rate associated with systematic lymph node dissection. Despite heterogeneity in the design of the studies included, there seems to be a trend showing no improvement on OS for systematic lymph node dissection in node negative patients. A well-conducted prospective trial is mandatory to evaluate this matter.

Download Full-text