Literature DB >> 26832880

Lymph Node Involvement Pattern and Survival Differences of FIGO IIIC and FIGO IIIA1 Ovarian Cancer Patients After Primary Complete Tumor Debulking Surgery: A 10-Year Retrospective Analysis of the Tumor Bank Ovarian Cancer Network.

Khayal Gasimli1,2, Elena Ioana Braicu1,2, Mani Nassir2, Rolf Richter1,2, Aygun Babayeva2, Radoslav Chekerov1,2, Silvia Darb-Esfahani3, Jalid Sehouli4,5, Mustafa Zelal Muallem1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The main goal of the current study was to compare survival differences among subgroups of primary ovarian cancer patients in International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stages IIIC and IIIA1 after complete tumor debulking surgery.
METHODS: A total of 218 patients with primary ovarian cancer who received complete cytoreductive surgery were included in the current retrospective analysis of the validated Tumor Bank Ovarian Cancer Network Database, which covers the periods January 2002 until December 2012. According to their tumor spread pattern, patients were divided into three groups: Group A (peritoneum only), Group B (peritoneum and lymph nodes), and Group C (lymph nodes only). Associations between groups and clinicopathological factors were analyzed using standard statistical procedures.
RESULTS: The vast majority of patients were classified into Group B. Lymph node involvement was detected in 70.5 % of the cases where peritoneal implants presented ≥2 cm beyond the pelvis (Group A + B). The estimated 5-year overall survival (OS) rates were 47.4 % in Group A, 45.1 % in Group B, and 91.7 % in Group C (p < 0.01). In the subgroup analysis of Group B, both pelvic and para-aortic lymph node involvement was found in 57 % of patients. Patients in Group B who had para-aortic lymph node involvement only had better median progression-free survival (PFS) compared with patients with pelvic lymph node involvement only and pelvic and para-aortic lymph node involvement (28, 16, and 18 months, respectively; p = 0.02). The median OS differed significantly between patients with para-aortic lymph node involvement only versus patients with both pelvic and para-aortic involvement (68.5 vs. 46.7 months; p = 0.02). Three-year PFS was 90.0 % in FIGO IIIA1(i) and 62.6 % in FIGO IIIA1(ii) (hazard ratio 2.30, 95 % confidence interval 0.45-11.58).
CONCLUSIONS: Patients with FIGO stage IIIC with lymph node involvement only had the best clinical outcome compared with patients in the same stage with peritoneal involvement only. Furthermore, involvement of both pelvic and para-aortic lymph nodes were of the same infrequency, and involvement of only para-aortic lymph nodes in this stage resulted in a better chance of survival than involvement of pelvic lymph nodes only or both pelvic and para-aortic lymph nodes simultaneously. In accordance with the revised FIGO classification of 2013, our study revealed that FIGO IIIA1(i) is prognostically better compared with FIGO IIIA1(ii).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26832880     DOI: 10.1245/s10434-015-4959-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol        ISSN: 1068-9265            Impact factor:   5.344


  7 in total

1.  Lymphatic tuberculosis after lymphadenectomy for ovarian cancer: a case report.

Authors:  Shuang Sheng; Bo Chi; Yan Kuang
Journal:  Gland Surg       Date:  2022-02

Review 2.  Impact of residual disease as a prognostic factor for survival in women with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer after primary surgery.

Authors:  Andrew Bryant; Shaun Hiu; Patience T Kunonga; Ketankumar Gajjar; Dawn Craig; Luke Vale; Brett A Winter-Roach; Ahmed Elattar; Raj Naik
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2022-09-26

3.  Validity of the 2014 FIGO Stage IIIA1 Subclassification for Ovarian, Fallopian Tube, and Peritoneal Cancers.

Authors:  Ayumu Matsuoka; Shinichi Tate; Kyoko Nishikimi; Masami Iwamoto; Satoyo Otsuka; Makio Shozu
Journal:  In Vivo       Date:  2022 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 2.406

4.  Relationship Between Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy and Log Odds of Positive Lymph Nodes and Their Prognostic Role in Advanced Ovarian Cancer Patients With Optimal Cytoreductive Surgery.

Authors:  Yue-Min Hou; Yan Xue; Jin-Meng Yao; Fang Feng; Rui-Fang An
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2022-05-16       Impact factor: 5.738

5.  A novel nomogram based on LODDS to predict the prognosis of epithelial ovarian cancer.

Authors:  Xue-Lian Xu; Hao Cheng; Meng-Si Tang; Hai-Liang Zhang; Rui-Yan Wu; Yan Yu; Xuan Li; Xiu-Min Wang; Jia Mai; Chen-Lu Yang; Lin Jiao; Zhi-Ling Li; Zhen-Mei Zhong; Rong Deng; Jun-Dong Li; Xiao-Feng Zhu
Journal:  Oncotarget       Date:  2017-01-31

6.  Metastasis to para-aortic lymph nodes cephalad to the renal veins in patients with ovarian cancer.

Authors:  Shinichi Komiyama; Masaru Nagashima; Tomoko Taniguchi; Takayuki Rikitake; Mineto Morita
Journal:  World J Surg Oncol       Date:  2020-04-01       Impact factor: 2.754

7.  Giant ovarian tumor with colorectal cancer: suggestion concerning the need for colonoscopy screening in cases with large ovarian tumor-a report of three cases.

Authors:  Yoshiaki Maeda; Nozomi Minagawa; Hirotaka Shoji; Tadayuki Kobayashi; Keiichiro Yamamoto
Journal:  BMC Surg       Date:  2022-03-23       Impact factor: 2.102

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.