Article Data

  • Views 632
  • Dowloads 155

Original Research

Open Access

Complete cytoreductive surgery, the key factor for survival in advanced ovarian cancer. Experience of an intermediate volume hospital

  • Irina Esteves-Krasteva1
  • José Ángel Minguez2
  • José María Aramendía3
  • Marta Santisteban3,5
  • Fernando Martinez-Regueira4
  • Gabriel Zozaya-Larequi4
  • Juan Luis Alcázar2,*,
  • Matías Jurado2

1Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Hospital de Estella, Estella, Navarra, Spain

2Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Clinica Universidad de Navarra, Pamplona, Spain

3Department of Medical Oncology, Clinica Universidad de Navarra, Pamplona, Spain

4Department of Surgery, Clinica Universidad de Navarra, Pamplona, Spain

5IdiSNA, Navarra Institute for Health Research, Pamplona, Spain

DOI: 10.31083/j.ejgo.2020.06.2090 Vol.41,Issue 6,December 2020 pp.906-912

Submitted: 13 March 2020 Accepted: 26 April 2020

Published: 15 December 2020

*Corresponding Author(s): Juan Luis Alcázar E-mail: jlalcazar@unav.es

Abstract

Introduction: We aimed to analyze the outcome in a series of women with primary advanced ovarian cancer in an Intermediate Volume Hospital where new surgical and chemotherapy treatments were implemented over a period of 14 years. Material and Methods: One hundred and twenty-seven women with stage IIIB-IV disease underwent primary (76.4%) or interval debulking surgery (23.6%). Fifty-seven were operated on from 2000 to 2005 (Group 1) and 70 from 2006 to 2014 (Group 2). Results: No gross residual disease was achieved in 51.5% and 43.3% of women who underwent primary and interval surgery, respectively. For no gross and < 1cm residual disease, median overall and progression-free survival were 94.7 vs. 60.6 months (p = 0.001) and 25.3 vs. 20.0 months, respectively (p = 0.02). The rate of no gross residual (36.8 to 60.0%) and 5-yr median overall survival (56.3 to 73.7 months) increased between 2000-2005 (Group 1) and from 2006 to 2014 (Group 2). On multivariate analysis, interval surgery, multiple peritoneal implants and residual disease were predictive of overall and progression-free survival. Conclusions: Survival after primary and interval debulking surgery progressively correlates with decrease in residual disease. Increasing rates of successful primary surgery are possible through standardization and adoption of best practices without increasing morbidity.


Keywords

Ovarian cancer; Cytoreduction; Neoadjuvant chemotherapy; Bevacizumab; Hospital volume.


Cite and Share

Irina Esteves-Krasteva,José Ángel Minguez,José María Aramendía,Marta Santisteban,Fernando Martinez-Regueira,Gabriel Zozaya-Larequi,Juan Luis Alcázar,Matías Jurado. Complete cytoreductive surgery, the key factor for survival in advanced ovarian cancer. Experience of an intermediate volume hospital. European Journal of Gynaecological Oncology. 2020. 41(6);906-912.

References

[1] du Bois A., Reuss A., Pujade-Lauraine E., Harter P., Ray-Coquard I. and Pfisterer J.: “Role of surgical outcome as prognostic factor in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer: A combined exploratory analysis of 3 prospectively randomized phase 3 multicenter trials”. Cancer, 2009, 115, 1234-1244.

[2] Elattar A., Bryant A., Winter-Roach B.A., Hatem M., Naik R.: “Optimal primary surgical treatment for advanced epithelial ovarian cancer”. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev., 2011, 2011, CD007565.

[3] Chang S., Hodeib M., Chang J., Bristow R.E.: “Survival impact of complete cytoreduction to no gross residual disease for advanced-stage ovarian cancer: a meta-analysis”. Gynecol. Oncol., 2013, 130, 493- 498.

[4] Wallace S., Kumar A., Mc Gree M., Weaver A., Mariani A., Langstraat C., et al.: “Efforts at maximal cytoreduction improve survival in ovarian cancer patients, even when complete gross resection is not feasible”. Gynecol. Oncol., 2017, 145, 21-26.

[5] Morrison J., Haldar K., Kehoe S., Lawrie T.A.: “Chemotherapy versus surgery for initial treatment in advanced ovarian epithelial cancer”. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev., 2012, 8, CD005343

[6] Timmermans M., van der Hel O., Sonke G.S., Van de Vijver K.K., van der Aa M.A., Kruitwagen R.F.: “The prognostic value of residual disease after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in advanced ovarian cancer: a systematic review”. Gynecol. Oncol., 2019, 153, 445-451.

[7] Wright J.D., Huang Y., Melamed A., Tergas A.I., St. Clair C.M., Hou J. Y., et al.: “Potential consequences of minimum-volume standards for hospitals treating women with ovarian cancer”. Obstet. Gynecol., 2019, 133, 1109-1119.

[8] Chang S., Bristow R.E., Ryu H.: “Impact of complete cytoreduction leaving no gross residual disease associated with radical cytoreductive surgical procedures on survival in advanced ovarian cancer”. Ann. Surg. Oncol., 2012, 19, 4059-4067.

[9] Dindo D., Demartines N., Clavien P.: “Classification of surgical complications”. Ann. Surg., 2004, 240, 205-213.

[10] Winter W.E., Maxwell G.L., Tian C., Carlson J.W., Ozols R.F., Rose P. G., et al.: “Prognostic factors for stage iii epithelial ovarian cancer: a gynecologic oncology group study”. J. Clin. Oncol., 2007, 25, 3621-3627.

[11] Chiva L. M., Castellanos T., Alonso S., Gonzalez-Martin A.: “Minimal Macroscopic Residual Disease (0.1–1 cm). Is It Still a Surgical Goal in Advanced Ovarian Cancer?”. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer, 2016, 26, 906-911.

[12] Wright J.D., Chen L., Hou J.Y., Burke W.M., Tergas A.I., Ananth C. V., et al.: “Association of hospital volume and quality of care with survival for ovarian cancer”. Obstet. Gynecol., 2017, 130, 545-553.

[13] Harter P., Muallem Z.M., Buhrmann C., Lorenz D., Kaub C., Hils R., et al.: “Impact of a structured quality management program on surgical outcome in primary advanced ovarian cancer”. Gynecol. Oncol., 2011, 121, 615-619.

[14] Chi D.S., Eisenhauer E.L., Zivanovic O., Sonoda Y., Abu-Rustum N. R., Levine D.A., et al.: “Improved progression-free and overall survival in advanced ovarian cancer as a result of a change in surgical paradigm”. Gynecol. Oncol., 2009, 114, 26-31.

[15] du Bois A., Rochon J., Pfisterer J., Hoskins W. J.: “Variations in institutional infrastructure, physician specialization and experience, and outcome in ovarian cancer: A systematic review”. Gynecol. Oncol., 2009, 112, 422-436.

[16] Bristow R.E., Palis B.E., Chi D.S., Cliby W.A.: “The National Cancer Database report on advanced-stage epithelial ovarian cancer: impact of hospital surgical case volume on overall survival and surgical treatment paradigm”. Gynecol. Oncol., 2010, 118, 262-267.

[17] Eisenhauer E.L., Abu-Rustum N.R., Sonoda Y., Levine D.A., Poynor E.A., Aghajanian C., et al.: “The addition of extensive up-per abdominal surgery to achieve optimal cytoreduction improves survival in patients with stages IIIC–IV epithelial ovarian cancer”. Gynecol. Oncol., 2006, 103, 1083-1090.

[18] Horowitz N. S., Miller A., Rungruang B., Richard S. D., Rodriguez N., Bookman M. A., et al.: “Does Aggressive Surgery Improve Outcomes? Interaction Between Preoperative Disease Burden and Complex Surgery in Patients with Advanced-Stage Ovarian Cancer: An Analysis of GOG 182”. J. Clin. Oncol., 2015, 33, 937-943.

[19] Aletti G.D., Dowdy S.C., Gostout B.S., Jones M.B., Stanhope C.R., Wilson T.O., et al.: “Aggressive surgical effort and improved survival in advanced-stage ovarian cancer”. Obstet. Gynecol., 2006, 107, 77-85.

[20] Fotopoulou C., Sehouli J., Aletti G., Harter P., Mahner S., Querleu D., et al.: “Value of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer: a european perspective”. J. Clin. Oncol., 2017, 35, 587-590.

[21] Chiva L., Lapuente F., Castellanos T., Alonso S., Gonzalez-Martin A.: “What Should We Expect After a Complete Cytoreduction at the Time of Interval or Primary Debulking Surgery in Advanced Ovarian Cancer?”. Ann. Surg. Oncol., 2016, 23, 1666-1673.

[22] Wright A.A., Bohlke K., Armstrong D.K., Bookman M.A., Cliby W. A., Coleman R.L., et al.: “Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for newly diagnosed, advanced ovarian cancer: society of gynecologic oncology and american society of clinical oncology clinical practice guideline”. J. Clin. Oncol., 2016, 34, 3460-3473.

[23] Chi D.S., Musa F., Dao F., Zivanovic O., Sonoda Y., Leitao M.M., et al.: “An analysis of patients with bulky advanced stage ovarian, tubal, and peritoneal carcinoma treated with primary debulking surgery (PDS) during an identical time period as the randomized EORTC-NCIC trial of PDS vs. neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT)”. Gynecol. Oncol., 2012, 124, 10-14.

[24] Reuss A., du Bois A., Harter P., Fotopoulou C., Sehouli J., Aletti G., et al.: “TRUST: Trial of Radical Upfront Surgical Therapy in advanced ovarian cancer (ENGOT ov33/AGO‐OVAR OP7)”. J. Gy-necol. Oncol., 2019, 29, 1327-1331.

[25] Tewari D., Java J.J., Salani R., Armstrong D.K., Markman M., Her-zog T., et al.: “Long-term survival advantage and prognostic factors associated with intraperitoneal chemotherapy treatment in advanced ovarian cancer: a gynecologic oncology group study”. J. Clin. On-col., 2015, 33, 1460-1466.

[26] Jaaback K., Johnson N., Lawrie T.A.: “Intraperitoneal chemotherapy for the initial management of primary epithelial ovarian cancer”. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev., 2011, 2011, CD005340.

[27] Walker J.L., Brady M.F., Wenzel L., Fleming G.F., Huang H.Q., DiSilvestro P.A., et al.: ”Randomized Trial of Intravenous Versus Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy Plus Bevacizumab in Advanced Ovarian Carcinoma: an NRG Oncology/Gynecologic Oncology Group Study”. J. Clin. Oncol., 2019, 37, 1380-1390.

[28] González Martín A., Oza A.M., Embleton A.C., Pfisterer J., Leder-mann J.A., Pujade-Lauraine E., et al.: “Exploratory outcome analyses according to stage and/or residual disease in the ICON7 trial of carboplatin and paclitaxel with or without bevacizumab for newly diagnosed ovarian cancer”. Gynecol. Oncol., 2019, 152, 53-60.

[29] Tewari K.S., Burger R.A., Enserro D., Norquist B.M., Swisher E.M., Brady M.F., et al.: ”Final overall survival of a randomized trial of bevacizumab for primary treatment of ovarian cancer”. J Clin Oncol, 2019, 37, 2317-2328.


Abstracted / indexed in

Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch) Created as SCI in 1964, Science Citation Index Expanded now indexes over 9,500 of the world’s most impactful journals across 178 scientific disciplines. More than 53 million records and 1.18 billion cited references date back from 1900 to present.

Biological Abstracts Easily discover critical journal coverage of the life sciences with Biological Abstracts, produced by the Web of Science Group, with topics ranging from botany to microbiology to pharmacology. Including BIOSIS indexing and MeSH terms, specialized indexing in Biological Abstracts helps you to discover more accurate, context-sensitive results.

Google Scholar Google Scholar is a freely accessible web search engine that indexes the full text or metadata of scholarly literature across an array of publishing formats and disciplines.

JournalSeek Genamics JournalSeek is the largest completely categorized database of freely available journal information available on the internet. The database presently contains 39226 titles. Journal information includes the description (aims and scope), journal abbreviation, journal homepage link, subject category and ISSN.

Current Contents - Clinical Medicine Current Contents - Clinical Medicine provides easy access to complete tables of contents, abstracts, bibliographic information and all other significant items in recently published issues from over 1,000 leading journals in clinical medicine.

BIOSIS Previews BIOSIS Previews is an English-language, bibliographic database service, with abstracts and citation indexing. It is part of Clarivate Analytics Web of Science suite. BIOSIS Previews indexes data from 1926 to the present.

Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition aims to evaluate a journal’s value from multiple perspectives including the journal impact factor, descriptive data about a journal’s open access content as well as contributing authors, and provide readers a transparent and publisher-neutral data & statistics information about the journal.

Submission Turnaround Time

Conferences

Top