Pre-operative neoadjuvant chemotherapy cycles and survival in newly diagnosed ovarian cancer: what is the optimal number? A Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center Team Ovary study

被引:33
作者
Liu, Ying L. [1 ]
Zhou, Qin C. [2 ]
Iasonos, Alexia [2 ]
Chi, Dennis S. [3 ]
Zivanovic, Oliver [3 ]
Sonoda, Yukio [3 ]
Gardner, Ginger [3 ]
Broach, Vance [3 ]
O'Cearbhaill, Roisin [1 ]
Konner, Jason A. [1 ]
Grisham, Rachel [1 ]
Aghajanian, Carol A. [1 ]
Abu-Rustum, Nadeem R. [3 ]
Tew, William [1 ]
Long Roche, Kara [3 ]
机构
[1] Mem Sloan Kettering Canc Ctr, Med, New York, NY USA
[2] Mem Sloan Kettering Canc Ctr, Epidemiol & Biostat, New York, NY USA
[3] Mem Sloan Kettering Canc Ctr, Surg, 1275 York Ave, New York, NY 10021 USA
关键词
ovarian cancer; INTERVAL DEBULKING SURGERY; GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY; CYTOREDUCTION; PERITONEAL; IMPACT;
D O I
10.1136/ijgc-2020-001641
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Objective Although trials of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in ovarian cancer use 3 neoadjuvant cycles, real-world practice varies. We sought to evaluate the influence of increasing pre-operative cycles on survival, accounting for surgical outcomes. Methods We identified 199 women with newly diagnosed ovarian cancer recommended for neoadjuvant chemotherapy who underwent interval debulking surgery from July 2015 to December 2018. Non-parametric tests were used to compare clinical characteristics by neoadjuvant cycles. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate differences in progression-free and overall survival. The log-rank test was used to assess the relationship of covariates to outcome. Results The median number of neoadjuvant cycles was 4 (range 3-8), with 56 (28%) women receiving >= 5 cycles. Compared with those receiving 3 or 4, women with >= 5 neoadjuvant cycles received fewer or no post-operative cycles (p<0.001) but had no other differences in clinical factors (p>0.05). Complete gross resection rates were similar among those receiving 3, 4, and >= 5 neoadjuvant cycles (68.5%, 70%, and 71.4%, respectively, p=0.96). There were no significant differences in progression-free or overall survival when comparing 3 versus 4 neoadjuvant cycles. However, more cycles (>= 5 vs 4) were associated with worse progression-free survival, even after adjustment for BRCA status and complete gross resection (HR 2.20, 95% CI 1.45 to 3.33, p<0.001), and worse overall survival, even after adjustment for histology, response on imaging, and complete gross resection rates (HR 2.78, 95% CI 1.37 to 5.63, p=0.016). The most common reason for receiving >= 5 cycles was extent of disease requiring more neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Conclusions Despite maximal cytoreduction, patients receiving >= 5 neoadjuvant cycles have a poorer prognosis than those receiving 3-4 cycles. Future studies should focus on reducing surgical morbidity and optimizing novel therapies in this high-risk group.
引用
收藏
页码:1915 / 1921
页数:7
相关论文
共 28 条
[1]   A new frontier for quality of care in gynecologic oncology surgery: Multi-institutional assessment of short-term outcomes for ovarian cancer using a risk-adjusted model [J].
Aletti, Giovanni D. ;
Santillan, Antonio ;
Eisenhauer, Eric L. ;
Hu, Jae ;
Aletti, Giacomo ;
Podratz, Karl C. ;
Bristow, Robert E. ;
Chi, Dennis S. ;
Cliby, William A. .
GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY, 2007, 107 (01) :99-106
[2]   Neoadjuvant chemotherapy and chemotherapy cycle number: A national multicentre study [J].
Altman, Alon D. ;
McGee, Jacob ;
May, Taymaa ;
Lane, Kelly ;
Lu, Lin ;
Xu, Wei ;
Ghatage, Prafull ;
Rosen, Barry .
GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY, 2017, 147 (02) :257-261
[3]   The Impact of Number of Cycles of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy on Survival of Patients Undergoing Interval Debulking Surgery for Stage IIIC-IV Unresectable Ovarian Cancer Results From a Multi-Institutional Study [J].
Bogani, Giorgio ;
Matteucci, Laura ;
Tamberi, Stefano ;
Arcangeli, Valentina ;
Ditto, Antonino ;
Maltese, Giuseppa ;
Signorelli, Mauro ;
Martinelli, Fabio ;
Chiappa, Valentina ;
Maggiore, Umberto Leone Roberti ;
Perotto, Stefania ;
Scaffa, Cono ;
Comerci, Giuseppe ;
Stefanetti, Marco ;
Raspagliesi, Francesco ;
Lorusso, Domenica .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GYNECOLOGICAL CANCER, 2017, 27 (09) :1856-1862
[4]  
Bowman A.W., 1997, APPL SMOOTHING TECHN, DOI DOI 10.1007/S001800000033
[5]   Platinum-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy and interval surgical cytoreduction for advanced ovarian cancer: A meta-analysis [J].
Bristow, Robert E. ;
Chi, Dennis S. .
GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY, 2006, 103 (03) :1070-1076
[6]   A NEW METHOD OF CLASSIFYING PROGNOSTIC CO-MORBIDITY IN LONGITUDINAL-STUDIES - DEVELOPMENT AND VALIDATION [J].
CHARLSON, ME ;
POMPEI, P ;
ALES, KL ;
MACKENZIE, CR .
JOURNAL OF CHRONIC DISEASES, 1987, 40 (05) :373-383
[7]   What is the optimal goal of primary cytoreductive surgery for bulky stage IIIC epithelial ovarian carcinoma (EOC)? [J].
Chi, D. S. ;
Eisenhauer, E. L. ;
Lang, J. ;
Huh, J. ;
Haddad, L. ;
Abu-Rustum, N. R. ;
Sonoda, Y. ;
Levine, D. A. ;
Hensley, M. ;
Barakat, R. R. .
GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY, 2006, 103 (02) :559-564
[8]   Impact of neoadjuvant chemotherapy cycles prior to interval surgery in patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer [J].
Colombo, P. E. ;
Labaki, M. ;
Fabbro, M. ;
Bertrand, M. ;
Mourregot, A. ;
Gutowski, M. ;
Saint-Aubert, B. ;
Quenet, F. ;
Rouanet, P. ;
Mollevi, C. .
GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY, 2014, 135 (02) :223-230
[9]   The age-adjusted Charlson comorbidity index as a predictor of survival in surgically treated vulvar cancer patients [J].
Di Donato, Violante ;
Page, Zoe ;
Bracchi, Carlotta ;
Tomao, Federica ;
Musella, Angela ;
Perniota, Giorgia ;
Panici, Pierluigi Benedetti .
JOURNAL OF GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY, 2019, 30 (01)
[10]   Role of Surgical Outcome as Prognostic Factor in Advanced Epithelial Ovarian Cancer: A Combined Exploratory Analysis of 3 Prospectively Randomized Phase 3 Multicenter Trials By the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynaekologische Onkologie Studiengruppe Ovarialkarzinom (AGO-OVAR) and the Groupe d'Investigateurs Nationaux Pour les Etudes des Cancers de l'Ovaire (GINECO) [J].
du Bois, Andreas ;
Reuss, Alexander ;
Pujade-Lauraine, Eric ;
Harter, Philipp ;
Ray-Coquard, Isabelle ;
Pfisterer, Jacobus .
CANCER, 2009, 115 (06) :1234-1244