J Alexandre1, I Ray-Coquard2, F Selle3, A Floquet4, P Cottu5, B Weber6, C Falandry7, D Lebrun8, E Pujade-Lauraine9. 1. Medical Oncology Unit, Université Paris-Descartes, Hôtel-Dieu, Paris. Electronic address: jerome.alexandre@htd.aphp.fr. 2. Medical Oncology Department, Centre Léon Bérard, Lyon. 3. Medical Oncology Department, Hôpital Tenon, Paris. 4. Medical Oncology Department, Institut Bergonié, Bordeaux. 5. Medical Oncology Department, Institut Curie, Paris. 6. Medical Oncology Department, Centre Alexis Vautrin, Nancy. 7. Medical Oncology Department, CHU Lyon Sud, Pierre-Bénite. 8. Medical Oncology Department, Centre Jean Godinot, Reims, France. 9. Medical Oncology Unit, Université Paris-Descartes, Hôtel-Dieu, Paris.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Advanced mucinous epithelial ovarian carcinoma (mEOC) has been associated with a worse prognosis than the more common serous epithelial ovarian carcinomas (sEOC), but it remains unclear whether this observation reflects a more aggressive clinical presentation and/or chemoresistance. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data from four randomized phase III and one phase II advanced epithelial ovarian carcinoma (EOC) first-line clinical trials were retrospectively collected, yielding 1118 patients with advanced EOC (International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stages IIB-IV), 85% of whom were treated with paclitaxel (Taxol)-carboplatin-based chemotherapy. RESULTS: Based on 786 patients with sEOC and 54 (5%) with mEOC, peritoneal carcinomatosis were more limited in mEOC, which was more frequently stages IIB-IIIB (32% versus 19%, P = 0.001) and had more frequently macroscopic complete resection after initial surgery (50% of stages II-III versus 30%, P = 0.02). In contrast, visceral metastases (stage IV) were more frequent in mEOC (30% versus 15%, P = 0.004). mEOC had a lower response rate to carboplatin-paclitaxel, and shorter progression-free and overall survival rates, for both stage IV and optimally debulked stages II-III patients. CONCLUSIONS: Advanced mEOC appears to be highly chemoresistant and complete resection of peritoneal metastases is unable to reverse its poor prognosis. New therapeutic options are needed.
BACKGROUND: Advanced mucinous epithelial ovarian carcinoma (mEOC) has been associated with a worse prognosis than the more common serous epithelial ovarian carcinomas (sEOC), but it remains unclear whether this observation reflects a more aggressive clinical presentation and/or chemoresistance. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data from four randomized phase III and one phase II advanced epithelial ovarian carcinoma (EOC) first-line clinical trials were retrospectively collected, yielding 1118 patients with advanced EOC (International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stages IIB-IV), 85% of whom were treated with paclitaxel (Taxol)-carboplatin-based chemotherapy. RESULTS: Based on 786 patients with sEOC and 54 (5%) with mEOC, peritoneal carcinomatosis were more limited in mEOC, which was more frequently stages IIB-IIIB (32% versus 19%, P = 0.001) and had more frequently macroscopic complete resection after initial surgery (50% of stages II-III versus 30%, P = 0.02). In contrast, visceral metastases (stage IV) were more frequent in mEOC (30% versus 15%, P = 0.004). mEOC had a lower response rate to carboplatin-paclitaxel, and shorter progression-free and overall survival rates, for both stage IV and optimally debulked stages II-III patients. CONCLUSIONS: Advanced mEOC appears to be highly chemoresistant and complete resection of peritoneal metastases is unable to reverse its poor prognosis. New therapeutic options are needed.
Authors: A F Leary; M Quinn; K Fujiwara; R L Coleman; E Kohn; T Sugiyama; R Glasspool; I Ray-Coquard; N Colombo; M Bacon; A Zeimet; A Westermann; E Gomez-Garcia; D Provencher; S Welch; W Small; D Millan; A Okamoto; G Stuart; K Ochiai Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2017-04-01 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Tao Liu; Wei Hu; Heather J Dalton; Hyun Jin Choi; Jie Huang; Yu Kang; Sunila Pradeep; Takahito Miyake; Jian H Song; Yunfei Wen; Chunhua Lu; Chad V Pecot; Justin Bottsford-Miller; Behrouz Zand; Nicholas B Jennings; Cristina Ivan; Gary E Gallick; Keith A Baggerly; David G Hangauer; Robert L Coleman; Michael Frumovitz; Anil K Sood Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2013-10-07 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Takeshi Hisamatsu; Michael McGuire; Sherry Y Wu; Rajesha Rupaimoole; Sunila Pradeep; Emine Bayraktar; Kyunghee Noh; Wei Hu; Jean M Hansen; Yasmin Lyons; Kshipra M Gharpure; Archana S Nagaraja; Lingegowda S Mangala; Takashi Mitamura; Cristian Rodriguez-Aguayo; Young Gyu Eun; Johnathon Rose; Geoffrey Bartholomeusz; Cristina Ivan; Ju-Seog Lee; Koji Matsuo; Michael Frumovitz; Kwong K Wong; Gabriel Lopez-Berestein; Anil K Sood Journal: Mol Cancer Ther Date: 2018-10-10 Impact factor: 6.261
Authors: Sarah J Storr; Sabreena Safuan; Caroline M Woolston; Tarek Abdel-Fatah; Suha Deen; Stephen Y Chan; Stewart G Martin Journal: J Cell Mol Med Date: 2012-10 Impact factor: 5.310
Authors: Robertson Mackenzie; Stefan Kommoss; Boris J Winterhoff; Benjamin R Kipp; Joaquin J Garcia; Jesse Voss; Kevin Halling; Anthony Karnezis; Janine Senz; Winnie Yang; Elena-Sophie Prigge; Miriam Reuschenbach; Magnus Von Knebel Doeberitz; Blake C Gilks; David G Huntsman; Jamie Bakkum-Gamez; Jessica N McAlpine; Michael S Anglesio Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2015-05-19 Impact factor: 4.430