Literature DB >> 17264334

Multi-institutional reciprocal validation study of computed tomography predictors of suboptimal primary cytoreduction in patients with advanced ovarian cancer.

Allison E Axtell1, Margaret H Lee, Robert E Bristow, Sean C Dowdy, William A Cliby, Steven Raman, John P Weaver, Mojan Gabbay, Michael Ngo, Scott Lentz, Ilana Cass, Andrew J Li, Beth Y Karlan, Christine H Holschneider.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Identify features on preoperative computed tomography (CT) scans to predict suboptimal primary cytoreduction in patients treated for advanced ovarian cancer in institution A. Reciprocally cross validate the predictors identified with those from two previously published cohorts from institutions B and C. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Preoperative CT scans from patients with stage III/IV epithelial ovarian cancer who underwent primary cytoreduction in institution A between 1999 and 2005 were retrospectively reviewed by radiologists blinded to surgical outcome. Fourteen criteria were assessed. Crossvalidation was performed by applying predictive model A to the patients from cohorts B and C, and reciprocally applying predictive models B and C to cohort A.
RESULTS: Sixty-five patients from institution A were included. The rate of optimal cytoreduction ( 1 cm residual disease) was 78%. Diaphragm disease and large bowel mesentery implants were the only CT predictors of suboptimal cytoreduction on univariate (P < .02) and multivariate analysis (P < .02). In combination (model A), these predictors had a sensitivity of 79%, a specificity of 75%, and an accuracy of 77% for suboptimal cytoreduction. When model A was applied to cohorts B and C, accuracy rates dropped to 34% and 64%, respectively. Reciprocally, models B and C had accuracy rates of 93% and 79% in their original cohorts, which fell to 74% and 48% in cohort A.
CONCLUSION: The high accuracy rates of CT predictors of suboptimal cytoreduction in the original cohorts could not be confirmed in the cross validation. Preoperative CT predictors should be used with caution when deciding between surgical cytoreduction and neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17264334     DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2006.07.7800

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Oncol        ISSN: 0732-183X            Impact factor:   44.544


  54 in total

1.  Molecular biomarkers of residual disease after surgical debulking of high-grade serous ovarian cancer.

Authors:  Susan L Tucker; Kshipra Gharpure; Shelley M Herbrich; Anna K Unruh; Alpa M Nick; Erin K Crane; Robert L Coleman; Jamie Guenthoer; Heather J Dalton; Sherry Y Wu; Rajesha Rupaimoole; Gabriel Lopez-Berestein; Bulent Ozpolat; Cristina Ivan; Wei Hu; Keith A Baggerly; Anil K Sood
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2014-04-22       Impact factor: 12.531

2.  Concordance of laparoscopic and laparotomic peritoneal cancer index using a two-step surgical protocol to select patients for cytoreductive surgery in advanced ovarian cancer.

Authors:  Martina Aida Angeles; Federico Migliorelli; Mathilde Del; Carlos Martínez-Gómez; Manon Daix; Sarah Bétrian; Erwan Gabiache; Gisèle Balagué; Sophie Leclerc; Eliane Mery; Laurence Gladieff; Gwénaël Ferron; Alejandra Martinez
Journal:  Arch Gynecol Obstet       Date:  2021-01-03       Impact factor: 2.344

3.  Advanced Primary Epithelial Ovarian and Peritoneal Carcinoma-Does Diagnostic Accuracy of Preoperative CT Scan for Detection of Peritoneal Metastatic Sites Reflect into Prediction of Suboptimal Debulking? A Prospective Study.

Authors:  Kiran Bagul; D K Vijaykumar; Anupama Rajanbabu; Mitchelle Aline Antony; Venkatesan Ranganathan
Journal:  Indian J Surg Oncol       Date:  2017-02-18

Review 4.  Prognostic and predictive value of CA-125 in the primary treatment of epithelial ovarian cancer: potentials and pitfalls.

Authors:  Iván Díaz-Padilla; Albiruni Ryan Abdul Razak; Lucas Minig; Marcus Q Bernardini; Josep María Del Campo
Journal:  Clin Transl Oncol       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 3.405

5.  Predictive modeling for determination of microscopic residual disease at primary cytoreduction: An NRG Oncology/Gynecologic Oncology Group 182 Study.

Authors:  Neil S Horowitz; G Larry Maxwell; Austin Miller; Chad A Hamilton; Bunja Rungruang; Noah Rodriguez; Scott D Richard; Thomas C Krivak; Jeffrey M Fowler; David G Mutch; Linda Van Le; Roger B Lee; Peter Argenta; David Bender; Krishnansu S Tewari; David Gershenson; James J Java; Michael A Bookman
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2017-11-23       Impact factor: 5.482

6.  The Chicago Consensus on Peritoneal Surface Malignancies: Management of Ovarian Neoplasms.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2020-04-13       Impact factor: 5.344

7.  Serum HE4 superior to CA125 in predicting poorer surgical outcome of epithelial ovarian cancer.

Authors:  Ying Shen; Li Li
Journal:  Tumour Biol       Date:  2016-09-15

8.  Can primary optimal cytoreduction be predicted in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer preoperatively?

Authors:  Azam-Sadat Mousavi; Marjan Moradi Mazhari; Mitra Modares Guilani; Fatemeh Ghaemmaghami; Nadereh Behtash; Setareh Akhavan
Journal:  World J Surg Oncol       Date:  2010-02-19       Impact factor: 2.754

Review 9.  MR imaging in ovarian cancer.

Authors:  S A A Sohaib; R H Reznek
Journal:  Cancer Imaging       Date:  2007-10-01       Impact factor: 3.909

10.  Role of CT scan-based and clinical evaluation in the preoperative prediction of optimal cytoreduction in advanced ovarian cancer: a prospective trial.

Authors:  G Ferrandina; G Sallustio; A Fagotti; G Vizzielli; A Paglia; E Cucci; A Margariti; L Aquilani; G Garganese; G Scambia
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2009-09-08       Impact factor: 7.640

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.