Literature DB >> 19471577

Stage IIIC epithelial ovarian cancer classified solely by lymph node metastasis has a more favorable prognosis than other types of stage IIIC epithelial ovarian cancer.

Su-Jin Baek1, Jeong-Yeol Park, Dae-Yeon Kim, Jong-Hyeok Kim, Yong-Man Kim, Young-Tak Kim, Joo-Hyun Nam.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To verify whether it can be justified to classify patients to stage IIIC epithelial ovarian cancer based on nodal involvement only.
METHODS: This study included all consecutive patients with stage IIIC epithelial ovarian cancer who underwent upfront cytoreductive surgery according to the FIGO guideline followed by platinum based chemotherapy from September 1989 to September 2006 at Asan Medical Center.
RESULTS: During the study period, a total of 272 patients met the inclusion criteria. Optimal cytoreduction was achieved in 213 patients, and complete cytoreduction was achieved in 85 patients. Median follow-up time was 37 months (range, 6-181 months). The 5-year disease free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) rate of all patients were 23% and 57%, respectively. Forty-one patients were allocated to stage IIIC by positive nodes only. Patients with stage IIIC disease due to positive nodes only had significantly longer DFS and OS compared to other stage IIIC patients (p<0.001 and p<0.001). The DFS and OS of these patients was significantly better than those of other stage IIIC patients who achieved complete or optimal cytoreduction (p<0.001 and p<0.001). The outcome was even better than that of stage IIIA and IIIB patients (p<0.05 and p<0.05).
CONCLUSION: Patients with stage IIIC epithelial ovarian cancer due to positive nodes only had a more favorable prognosis compared to other stage IIIC patients. Therefore, reevaluation of the current FIGO staging system for stage IIIC epithelial ovarian cancer is required.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Epithelial ovarian cancer; Lymph node metastasis; Prognosis; Stage IIIC

Year:  2008        PMID: 19471577      PMCID: PMC2676474          DOI: 10.3802/jgo.2008.19.4.223

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Gynecol Oncol        ISSN: 2005-0380            Impact factor:   4.401


  21 in total

1.  Assessing the adequacy of surgical staging for ovarian cancer.

Authors:  Thomas J Herzog
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 5.482

2.  Ovarian cancer patients with "node-positive-only" Stage IIIC disease have a more favorable outcome than Stage IIIA/B.

Authors:  G Ferrandina; G Scambia; F Legge; M Petrillo; V Salutari
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2007-07-05       Impact factor: 5.482

Review 3.  Significance of lymph node sampling in epithelial carcinoma of the ovary.

Authors:  F Carnino; G Fuda; G Ciccone; L Iskra; E Guercio; D Dadone; P F Conte
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  1997-06       Impact factor: 5.482

4.  Is it justified to classify patients to Stage IIIC epithelial ovarian cancer based on nodal involvement only?

Authors:  William A Cliby; Giovanni D Aletti; Timothy O Wilson; Karl C Podratz
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2006-10-18       Impact factor: 5.482

5.  The validity and significance of substage IIIC by node involvement in epithelial ovarian cancer: impact of nodal metastasis on patient survival.

Authors:  K Kanazawa; T Suzuki; M Tokashiki
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  1999-05       Impact factor: 5.482

6.  Cytoreductive surgery in advanced epithelial cancer of the ovary: the impact of aortic and pelvic lymphadenectomy.

Authors:  N M Spirtos; G M Gross; J L Freddo; S C Ballon
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  1995-03       Impact factor: 5.482

7.  Patients with ovarian carcinoma upstaged to stage III after systematic lymphadenctomy have similar survival to Stage I/II patients and superior survival to other Stage III patients.

Authors:  T Onda; H Yoshikawa; T Yasugi; M Mishima; S Nakagawa; M Yamada; K Matsumoto; Y Taketani
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1998-10-15       Impact factor: 6.860

8.  The influence of cytoreductive surgery on recurrence-free interval and survival in small-volume stage III epithelial ovarian cancer: a Gynecologic Oncology Group study.

Authors:  W J Hoskins; B N Bundy; J T Thigpen; G A Omura
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  1992-11       Impact factor: 5.482

9.  Cancer statistics, 2006.

Authors:  Ahmedin Jemal; Rebecca Siegel; Elizabeth Ward; Taylor Murray; Jiaquan Xu; Carol Smigal; Michael J Thun
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2006 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 508.702

10.  Cyclophosphamide and cisplatin compared with paclitaxel and cisplatin in patients with stage III and stage IV ovarian cancer.

Authors:  W P McGuire; W J Hoskins; M F Brady; P R Kucera; E E Partridge; K Y Look; D L Clarke-Pearson; M Davidson
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1996-01-04       Impact factor: 91.245

View more
  18 in total

1.  Should we modify the current FIGO staging system for stage IIIC ovarian cancer?

Authors:  Hee-Sug Ryu
Journal:  J Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2008-12-29       Impact factor: 4.401

Review 2.  Eighth Edition of the UICC Classification of Malignant Tumours: an overview of the changes in the pathological TNM classification criteria-What has changed and why?

Authors:  Luca Bertero; Federica Massa; Jasna Metovic; Roberto Zanetti; Isabella Castellano; Umberto Ricardi; Mauro Papotti; Paola Cassoni
Journal:  Virchows Arch       Date:  2017-12-05       Impact factor: 4.064

Review 3.  Revised FIGO staging system for cancer of the ovary, fallopian tube, and peritoneum: important implications for radiologists.

Authors:  Tsukasa Saida; Yumiko Oishi Tanaka; Koji Matsumoto; Toyomi Satoh; Hiroyuki Yoshikawa; Manabu Minami
Journal:  Jpn J Radiol       Date:  2015-12-22       Impact factor: 2.374

Review 4.  Ovarian cancer.

Authors:  Ursula A Matulonis; Anil K Sood; Lesley Fallowfield; Brooke E Howitt; Jalid Sehouli; Beth Y Karlan
Journal:  Nat Rev Dis Primers       Date:  2016-08-25       Impact factor: 52.329

5.  What is the role of retroperitoneal exploration in optimally debulked stage IIIC epithelial ovarian cancer? An NRG Oncology/Gynecologic Oncology Group ancillary data study.

Authors:  Bunja J Rungruang; Austin Miller; Thomas C Krivak; Neil S Horowitz; Noah Rodriguez; Chad A Hamilton; Floor J Backes; Linda F Carson; Michael Friedlander; David G Mutch; Michael J Goodheart; Krishnansu S Tewari; Robert M Wenham; Michael A Bookman; G Larry Maxwell; Scott D Richard
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2016-11-16       Impact factor: 6.860

6.  EphA2 immunoconjugate as molecularly targeted chemotherapy for ovarian carcinoma.

Authors:  Jeong-Won Lee; Hee Dong Han; Mian M K Shahzad; Seung Wook Kim; Lingegowda S Mangala; Alpa M Nick; Chunhua Lu; Robert R Langley; Rosemarie Schmandt; Hye-Sun Kim; Shenlan Mao; John Gooya; Christine Fazenbaker; Dowdy Jackson; David A Tice; Charles N Landen; Robert L Coleman; Anil K Sood
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2009-07-29       Impact factor: 13.506

7.  [New FIGO classification of ovarian, fallopian tube and primary peritoneal cancer].

Authors:  A K Höhn; J Einenkel; C Wittekind; L-C Horn
Journal:  Pathologe       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 1.011

8.  Anti-Sp17 monoclonal antibody-doxorubicin conjugates as molecularly targeted chemotherapy for ovarian carcinoma.

Authors:  Jia-Xi Song; Fang-Qiu Li; Wang-Li Cao; Xuan Jia; Li-Ning Shi; Jing-Fen Lu; Chun-Fang Ma; Qian-Qian Kong
Journal:  Target Oncol       Date:  2013-08-14       Impact factor: 4.493

9.  Targeting HSP90 in ovarian cancers with multiple receptor tyrosine kinase coactivation.

Authors:  Yisheng Jiao; Wenbin Ou; Fanguo Meng; Haimeng Zhou; Aiyuan Wang
Journal:  Mol Cancer       Date:  2011-09-30       Impact factor: 27.401

Review 10.  Successful management of mucinous ovarian cancer by conservative surgery in week 6 of pregnancy: case report and literature review.

Authors:  Shan-Yang He; Hong-Wei Shen; Lin Xu; Xiao-Li Li; Shu-Zhong Yao
Journal:  Arch Gynecol Obstet       Date:  2012-08-01       Impact factor: 2.344

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.