| Literature DB >> 28606125 |
Fei Deng1, Xia Xu2, Mengmeng Lv1, Binhui Ren3, Yan Wang4, Wenwen Guo4, Jifeng Feng5, Xiaoxiang Chen6,7.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The survival duration of elderly patients with epithelial ovarian carcinoma is shorter than that of their younger counterparts. This variation in survival duration is likely attributed to differences in the distribution of histological type or grade, International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) staging, and undertreatment, but this observation remains controversial. This study aimed to investigate the biological factors other than selection bias associated with the decreased survival of elderly patients with ovarian carcinoma.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28606125 PMCID: PMC5469143 DOI: 10.1186/s13048-017-0331-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Ovarian Res ISSN: 1757-2215 Impact factor: 4.234
Fig. 2Strong 8-OHdG positive nuclei can be observed in high grade serous ovarian carcinoma. Stromal reaction is negative and cytoplasm is immunopositive in places (a). Moderate 8-OHdG positive nuclei can be observed in high grade serous ovarian carcinoma, nuclear immunostaining is also found (b). Weak 8-OHdG positive nuclei can also be observed in high grade serous ovarian carcinoma (c). Negative control staining for 8-OHdG is also demonstrated in high grade serous ovarian carcinoma (d)
Clinicopathologic characteristics of serous ovarian cancer
| Characteristic | ≥ 65 years N (%) | < 65 years N (%) |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Baseline CA-125 (U/mL, meida, range) | 960 (7–34,000) | 840 (7–30,900) | 0.55 |
| Body Mass Index (mean SD) | 24.1 (3.1) | 25.4 (3.8) | 0.04 |
| Grade | |||
| High | 106 (96.4) | 178 (87.3) | 0.02 |
| Low | 4 (3.6) | 26 (12.7) | |
| FIGO* stage | |||
| I | 3 (2.7) | 5 (2.5) | 0.84 |
| II | 8 (7.3) | 10 (4.9) | |
| III | 75 (68.2) | 146 (71.6) | |
| IV | 24 (21.8) | 43 (21.1) | |
| ECOG PS* | |||
| 0 | 44 (40.0%) | 104 (51.0%) | 0.03 |
| 1 | 47 (42.7%) | 83 (40.7%) | |
| ≥ 2 | 19 (17.3%) | 17 (8.3%) | |
| Primary treatment | |||
| NAC* | 31 (28.2%) | 30 (14.7%) | 0.00 |
| PDS | 50 (45.5%) | 151 (74.0%) | |
| Chemotherapy only | 18 (16.4%) | 8 (3.9%) | |
| No Treatment | 11 (10.0%) | 15 (7.4%) | |
| Surgical residual† | |||
| Optimal | 44 (54.3%) | 123 (68.0%) | 0.04 |
| Suboptimal | 33 (40.7%) | 48 (26.5%) | |
| Unknown | 4 (5.0%) | 10 (5.5%) | |
| Recurrence free interval (months) | |||
| ≤ 12 | 34 (47.2%) | 56 (35.7%) | 0.13 |
| > 12 | 38 (52.8%) | 101 (64.3%) | |
p , Chi-square P-value; Baseline&, Level at diagnosis; FIGO*, the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics; ECOG PS*, ECOG Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status; NAC*, Neoadjuvant chemotherapy; Optimal cytoreduction†, the absence of macroscopic disease on the completion of the surgical procedure
Fig. 1Histological grade and age were associated with mean concentrations of 8-OHdG in leukocyte DNA in serous ovarian carcinoma patients. Statistical significance was calculated using one-way ANOVA testing followed by post hoc analysis. *p < 0.05 vs. subjects with the characteristics in the blank bar
Univariate analysis of survival-related factors in serous ovarian cancer
| Variable | Progression-free survival | Overall survival | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age | 1.01 | 1.00–1.02 | 1.01 | 1.00–1.02 |
| FIGO stage | ||||
| I | 1.00 | (reference) | 1.00 | (reference) |
| II | 2.25 | 0.85–5.12 | 1.85 | 0.70–4.84 |
| III | 2.84 | 1.43–5.95 | 3.51 | 1.67–7.58 |
| IV | 3.28 | 1.52–6.87 | 4.87 | 2.25–8.83 |
| Grade | 1.87 | 1.25–2.90 | 2.30 | 1.68–3.81 |
| Ascites# | ||||
| < 500 mL | 1.00 | (reference) | 1.00 | (reference) |
| ≥ 500 mL | 1.75 | 0.79–6.23 | 1.15 | 0.70–5.97 |
| Surgery outcome | ||||
| Optimal | 1.00 | (reference) | 1.00 | (reference) |
| Suboptimal | 2.97 | 1.48–7.09 | 3.54 | 2.10–5.08 |
| NAC | ||||
| Yes | 1.00 | (reference) | 1.00 | (reference) |
| No | 1.15 | 0.74–3.28 | 1.10 | 0.70–4.27 |
| Baseline CA-125† | 1.01 | 1.00–1.02 | 1.01 | 1.00–1.02 |
OR, 95%CI*, odds ratio, 95% 95% confidence interval
Ascites#, ascites volume was estimated by ultrasound at diagnosis
Baseline CA-125†, Serum CA-125 concentration at diagnosis
Multivariate analysis of survival-related factors in serous ovarian cancer
| Variable | Progression-free survival | Overall survival | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age | 1.02 | 1.00–1.02 | 1.02 | 1.00–1.02 |
| FIGO stage | 1.33 | 1.12–1.63 | 1.49 | 1.29–1.75 |
| Grade | 1.61 | 1.10–2.59 | 1.88 | 1.35–2.90 |
| Baseline CA-125 | 1.00 | 1.00–1.02 | 1.01 | 1.00–1.01 |
| Surgery outcome | ||||
| Optimal | 1.00 | (reference) | 1.00 | (reference) |
| Suboptimal | 1.25 | 1.08–1.51 | 1.58 | 1.29–1.85 |
| Ascites | ||||
| < 500 mL | 1.00 | (reference) | 1.00 | (reference) |
| ≥ 500 mL | 1.04 | 0.75–2.05 | 1.05 | 0.59–2.72 |
| NAC | ||||
| Yes | 1.00 | (reference) | 1.00 | (reference) |
| No | 1.02 | 0.79–1.54 | 1.03 | 0.73–1.82 |
Fig. 3Elderly patients had shorter overall survival and progression-free survival than younger cases with serous ovarian carcinoma from JICR (a, b)
Fig. 4Increasing 8-OHdG concentration in leukocyte DNA is associated with poor prognosis of serous ovarian carcinoma patients received compete clinical response. a Low 8-OHdG concentration was associated with longer overall survival duration (42.8 vs. 30.0 months, p = 0.01); b Low 8-OhdG concentration was associated with longer progression-free survival duration (18.9 vs.14.6 months, p = 0.04)