Erin K Crane1, Charlotte C Sun1, Pedro T Ramirez1, Kathleen M Schmeler1, Anais Malpica2, David M Gershenson3. 1. Department of Gynecologic Oncology and Reproductive Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA. 2. Department of Pathology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA. 3. Department of Gynecologic Oncology and Reproductive Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA. Electronic address: dgershen@mdanderson.org.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: We sought to determine the benefit of secondary cytoreductive surgery (SCRS) in patients with low-grade serous ovarian or peritoneal carcinoma, and whether cytoreduction to no gross residual disease affects survival. METHODS: A single institution retrospective chart review was conducted in patients with recurrent low-grade serous carcinoma who underwent SCRS between 1995 and 2012. Data including demographics, survival, chemotherapy, disease characteristics at the time of surgery, residual disease, and operative complications were collected. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were calculated. Kaplan-Meier and log-rank tests were used to examine survival outcomes. RESULTS: Forty-one patients met inclusion criteria. The median time between primary tumor debulking and SCRS was 33.2 months. Of 41 eligible patients who underwent SCRS, 32 (78%) had gross residual disease at the completion of secondary surgery. The median PFS for patients with no gross residual disease after SCRS was 60.3 months, compared to 10.7 months for patients with gross residual disease (p = 0.008). Median OS from diagnosis for patients with no gross residual disease after SCRS was 167.5 months compared to 88.9 months (p = 0.10). Median OS from the time of SCRS for patients with no gross residual disease was 93.6 months compared to 45.8 months (p = 0.04). Complications occurred in 61% of patients after SCRS; there were no deaths directly attributable to surgery. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest a benefit to SCRS in patients with recurrent low-grade serous carcinoma. Efforts to maximally cytoreduce patients should be made as patients with no gross residual disease had a better PFS and a trend toward better OS.
OBJECTIVES: We sought to determine the benefit of secondary cytoreductive surgery (SCRS) in patients with low-grade serous ovarian or peritoneal carcinoma, and whether cytoreduction to no gross residual disease affects survival. METHODS: A single institution retrospective chart review was conducted in patients with recurrent low-grade serous carcinoma who underwent SCRS between 1995 and 2012. Data including demographics, survival, chemotherapy, disease characteristics at the time of surgery, residual disease, and operative complications were collected. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were calculated. Kaplan-Meier and log-rank tests were used to examine survival outcomes. RESULTS: Forty-one patients met inclusion criteria. The median time between primary tumor debulking and SCRS was 33.2 months. Of 41 eligible patients who underwent SCRS, 32 (78%) had gross residual disease at the completion of secondary surgery. The median PFS for patients with no gross residual disease after SCRS was 60.3 months, compared to 10.7 months for patients with gross residual disease (p = 0.008). Median OS from diagnosis for patients with no gross residual disease after SCRS was 167.5 months compared to 88.9 months (p = 0.10). Median OS from the time of SCRS for patients with no gross residual disease was 93.6 months compared to 45.8 months (p = 0.04). Complications occurred in 61% of patients after SCRS; there were no deaths directly attributable to surgery. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest a benefit to SCRS in patients with recurrent low-grade serous carcinoma. Efforts to maximally cytoreduce patients should be made as patients with no gross residual disease had a better PFS and a trend toward better OS.
Authors: Peter J Frederick; Pedro T Ramirez; Lacey McQuinn; Michael R Milam; Diane M Weber; Robert L Coleman; David M Gershenson; Charles N Landen Journal: Int J Gynecol Cancer Date: 2011-07 Impact factor: 3.437
Authors: Wen-Juan Tian; Dennis S Chi; Jalid Sehouli; Claes G Tropé; Rong Jiang; Ali Ayhan; Gennaro Cormio; Yan Xing; Georg-Peter Breitbach; Elena Ioana Braicu; Catherine A Rabbitt; Halldis Oksefjell; Christina Fotopoulou; Hans-Gerd Meerpohl; Andreas du Bois; Jonathan S Berek; Rong-Yu Zang; Philipp Harter Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2011-07-06 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Robert E Bristow; Dana R Gossett; David R Shook; Mariana L Zahurak; Rafael S Tomacruz; Deborah K Armstrong; Fredrick J Montz Journal: Cancer Date: 2002-08-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Kathleen M Schmeler; Charlotte C Sun; Diane C Bodurka; Michael T Deavers; Anais Malpica; Robert L Coleman; Pedro T Ramirez; David M Gershenson Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2007-12-26 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: John Farley; William E Brady; Vinod Vathipadiekal; Heather A Lankes; Robert Coleman; Mark A Morgan; Robert Mannel; S Diane Yamada; David Mutch; William H Rodgers; Michael Birrer; David M Gershenson Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2012-12-21 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: R Y Zang; P Harter; D S Chi; J Sehouli; R Jiang; C G Tropé; A Ayhan; G Cormio; Y Xing; K M Wollschlaeger; E I Braicu; C A Rabbitt; H Oksefjell; W J Tian; C Fotopoulou; J Pfisterer; A du Bois; J S Berek Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2011-08-30 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Heather J Dalton; Nicole D Fleming; Charlotte C Sun; Priya Bhosale; Kathleen M Schmeler; David M Gershenson Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2017-01-27 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Gulisa Turashvili; Rachel N Grisham; Sarah Chiang; Deborah F DeLair; Kay J Park; Robert A Soslow; Rajmohan Murali Journal: Histopathology Date: 2018-06-22 Impact factor: 5.087