Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · South Asian J Cancer 2022; 11(03): 207-212
DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-1754441
Original Article
Genitourinary Cancer

Is Optimal Cytoreduction Post Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy the Only Prognostic Factor in Advanced Ovarian Cancer?

Pravesh Dhiman
1   Medical Oncology, Department of RT and Oncology, IGMC, Shimla, Himachal Pradesh, India
,
P.P. Bapsy
2   Medical Oncology, Department of Medical Oncology, Apollo Hospitals, Bangalore, Karnataka, India
,
C.N. Patil
2   Medical Oncology, Department of Medical Oncology, Apollo Hospitals, Bangalore, Karnataka, India
,
Renu Raghupathi
2   Medical Oncology, Department of Medical Oncology, Apollo Hospitals, Bangalore, Karnataka, India
› Author Affiliations Funding None.
› Further Information
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Zoom Image
Pravesh Dhiman, DNB (Medical Oncology).

Background Epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) is one of the leading causes of cancer-related death in women. Approximately 70% of patients with EOC are diagnosed in advanced stage [The International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics(FIGO stage III and IV)] with an expected 5-year survival rate of 30%. Numerous studies have shown that survival with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) followed by interval debulking surgery (IDS) is noninferior to primary debulking surgery followed by chemotherapy.

Materials and Methods In this retroprospective observational study, 50 patients with advanced ovarian cancer, diagnosed from January 2012 to January 2015, were included and followed-up till January 2017. Correlation of NACT with patient profile, CA125 levels, clinicopathologic parameters, progression-free survival (PFS), and treatment response was studied. Statistical analysis was performed using log-rank test and Kaplan-Meir survival plots.

Results The extent of cytoreduction significantly correlated with PFS. The PFS was maximum in patients who had optimal cytoreduction (19 months) and 10 months in patients with suboptimal cytoreduction with p-value < 0.05. The survival was not significantly correlated with other parameters such as age, stage, preoperative CA125 levels, and ascites.

Conclusions The extent of cytoreduction following NACT in this study was associated with statistically significant PFS advantage in patients who were able to undergo optimal cytoreduction, but not significantly correlated to other factors such as age, stage, preoperative CA125 levels, and ascites. NACT followed by interval cytoreduction is an important modality affecting survival in advanced EOC. Further studies and longer follow-up are needed to demonstrate survival advantage over standard treatment.

Keywords

epithelial ovarian cancer - cytoreductive surgery - interval debulking surgery - neoadjuvant chemotherapy - progression-free survival


Publication History

Article published online:
11 July 2022

© 2022. MedIntel Services Pvt Ltd. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India

 

  • References

  • 1 Siegel R, Naishadham D, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2012. CA Cancer J Clin 2012; 62 (01) 10-29
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Stephen A, David MG, Recht A. Ovarian cancer, Fallopian tube carcinoma and peritoneal cancer. In: Devita VT, Lawrence TS, Rosenberg SA. eds. Devita, Hellman and Rosenberg's Cancer: Principles and Practice of Oncology. 10th ed. Philadelphia, USA: Wolters Kluwer; 2015: 1075-1076
    Google Scholar
  • 3 Vaughan S, Coward JI, Bast Jr RC. et al. Rethinking ovarian cancer: recommendations for improving outcomes. Nat Rev Cancer 2011; 11 (10) 719-725
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Ervik M. et al. GLOBOCAN 2012 v1.1, Cancer Incidence and Mortality Worldwide: IARC Cancer Base No. 11.
    Google Scholar
  • 5 Siegel R, Naishadham D, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2013. CA Cancer J Clin 2013; 63 (01) 11-30
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Torre LA, Bray F, Siegel RL, Ferlay J, Lortet-Tieulent J, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics, 2012. CA Cancer J Clin 2015; 65 (02) 87-108
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Sankaranarayanan R, Ferlay J. Worldwide burden of gynaecological cancer: the size of the problem. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2006; 20 (02) 207-225
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 National Cancer Registry Programme. Three Year Report of the PBCRs: 2012–2014, Chapter 7, Comparison of cancer incidence and patterns of all population based cancer registries.
    Google Scholar
  • 9 National Cancer Registry Programme. Three Year Report of the PBCRs: 2012–2014, Chapter 10, Trends over time for all sites and on selected sites of cancer & projection of burden of cancer.
    Google Scholar
  • 10 Razi S, Ghoncheh M, Mohammadian-Hafshejani A. et al. The incidence and mortality of ovarian cancer and their relationship with the Human Development Index in Asia. Ecancermedicalscience 2016; 10: 628
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Ozols RF, Bundy BN, Greer BE. et al; Gynecologic Oncology Group. Phase III trial of carboplatin and paclitaxel compared with cisplatin and paclitaxel in patients with optimally resected stage III ovarian cancer: a Gynecologic Oncology Group study. J Clin Oncol 2003; 21 (17) 3194-3200
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 du Bois A, Lück HJ, Meier W. et al; Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynäkologische Onkologie Ovarian Cancer Study Group. A randomized clinical trial of cisplatin/paclitaxel versus carboplatin/paclitaxel as first-line treatment of ovarian cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2003; 95 (17) 1320-1329
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Raja FA, Chopra N, Ledermann JA. Optimal first-line treatment in ovarian cancer. Ann Oncol 2012; 23 (Suppl. 10) x118-x127
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Burger RA, Brady MF, Bookman MA. et al; Gynecologic Oncology Group. Incorporation of bevacizumab in the primary treatment of ovarian cancer. N Engl J Med 2011; 365 (26) 2473-2483
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Perren TJ, Swart AM, Pfisterer J. et al; ICON7 Investigators. A phase 3 trial of bevacizumab in ovarian cancer. N Engl J Med 2011; 365 (26) 2484-2496
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Kaufman B, Shapira-Frommer R, Schmutzler RK. et al. Olaparib monotherapy in patients with advanced cancer and a germline BRCA1/2 mutation. J Clin Oncol 2015; 33 (03) 244-250
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Ledermann JA, Harter P, Gthisley C. et al. Overall survival in patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent serous ovarian cancer receiving olaparib maintenance monotherapy: an updated analysis from a Phase II, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Lancet Oncol 2016; 17 (11) 1579-1589
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Swisher EM, Lin KK, Oza AM. et al. Rucaparib in relapsed, platinum-sensitive high-grade ovarian carcinoma (ARIEL2 Part 1): an international, multicentre, open-label, phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol 2017; 18 (01) 75-87
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Kumar L, Hariprasad R, Kumar S. et al. Neo-adjuvant chemotherapy in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC): a prospective, randomized study. Indian J Med Paediatr Oncol 2009; 30 (05) 15
    Google Scholar
  • 20 Ezzati M, Abdullah A, Shariftabrizi A. et al. Recent advancements in prognostic factors of epithelial ovarian carcinoma. Int Sch Res Notices 2014; 2014: 953509
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Winter III WE, Maxwell GL, Tian C. et al; Gynecologic Oncology Group Study. Prognostic factors for stage III epithelial ovarian cancer: a Gynecologic Oncology Group Study. J Clin Oncol 2007; 25 (24) 3621-3627
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Eitan R, Levine DA, Abu-Rustum N. et al. The clinical significance of malignant pleural effusions in patients with optimally debulked ovarian carcinoma. Cancer 2005; 103 (07) 1397-1401
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Xu X, Deng F, Lv M, Ren B, Guo W, Chen X. Ascites regression following neoadjuvant chemotherapy in prediction of treatment outcome among stage IIIc to IV high-grade serous ovarian cancer. J Ovarian Res 2016; 9 (01) 85
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Gronlund B, Dehn H, Høgdall CK. et al. Cancer-associated serum antigen level: a novel prognostic indicator for survival in patients with recurrent ovarian carcinoma. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2005; 15 (05) 836-843
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Gupta D, Lis CG. Role of CA125 in predicting ovarian cancer survival - a review of the epidemiological literature. J Ovarian Res 2009; 2: 13
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Baruah U, Barmon D, Kataki AC, Deka P, Hazarika M, Saikia BJ. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer: a survival study. Indian J Med Paediatr Oncol 2015; 36 (01) 38-42
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Rutten MJ, Sonke GS, Westermann AM. et al. Prognostic value of residual disease after interval debulking surgery for FIGO stage IIIC and IV epithelial ovarian cancer. Obstet Gynecol Int 2015; 2015: 464123
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar