Sarah M Crafton1, David E Cohn2, Elyse N Llamocca3, Elaine Louden3, Jennifer Rhoades3, Ashley S Felix3. 1. Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Allegheny Health Network, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. 2. Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, Ohio. 3. Division of Epidemiology, Ohio State University College of Public Health, Columbus, Ohio.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study examined predictors of fertility-sparing surgery (FSS) among reproductive-age women diagnosed with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). In addition, relationships between FSS and survival were assessed in models stratified by tumor characteristics. METHODS: The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program and the National Cancer Database (NCDB) were queried for women 44 years old or younger with a primary EOC. FSS included unilateral salpingo-oophorectomy and uterine preservation, whereas surgeries including bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy and hysterectomy were categorized as non-FSS. Logistic regression was used to estimate multivariable-adjusted odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for associations between clinical characteristics (eg, age at diagnosis and race) and FSS odds. Multivariable Cox regression was used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs for FSS and overall survival in subgroups defined by stage and grade or by stage and histology. Analyses were stratified by database (SEER vs NCDB). RESULTS: This analysis included 9017 women (SEER, n = 3932; NCDB, n = 5085) with EOC diagnosed between the ages of 15 and 44 years. In both cohorts, factors associated with significantly higher FSS odds included a younger age, a more recent ovarian cancer diagnosis, and no adjuvant chemotherapy. FSS was significantly associated with lower overall survival among women with stage II to IV, serous EOC (SEER HR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.22-2.12). Significant associations between FSS and survival were not observed in other subgroups defined by stage and grade or by stage and histology. CONCLUSIONS: FSS appears to be safe for certain women with EOC but was related to poor survival among women with advanced-stage, serous EOC. Confirmatory studies with information on fertility intentions are needed.
BACKGROUND: This study examined predictors of fertility-sparing surgery (FSS) among reproductive-age women diagnosed with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). In addition, relationships between FSS and survival were assessed in models stratified by tumor characteristics. METHODS: The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program and the National Cancer Database (NCDB) were queried for women 44 years old or younger with a primary EOC. FSS included unilateral salpingo-oophorectomy and uterine preservation, whereas surgeries including bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy and hysterectomy were categorized as non-FSS. Logistic regression was used to estimate multivariable-adjusted odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for associations between clinical characteristics (eg, age at diagnosis and race) and FSS odds. Multivariable Cox regression was used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs for FSS and overall survival in subgroups defined by stage and grade or by stage and histology. Analyses were stratified by database (SEER vs NCDB). RESULTS: This analysis included 9017 women (SEER, n = 3932; NCDB, n = 5085) with EOC diagnosed between the ages of 15 and 44 years. In both cohorts, factors associated with significantly higher FSS odds included a younger age, a more recent ovarian cancer diagnosis, and no adjuvant chemotherapy. FSS was significantly associated with lower overall survival among women with stage II to IV, serous EOC (SEER HR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.22-2.12). Significant associations between FSS and survival were not observed in other subgroups defined by stage and grade or by stage and histology. CONCLUSIONS: FSS appears to be safe for certain women with EOC but was related to poor survival among women with advanced-stage, serous EOC. Confirmatory studies with information on fertility intentions are needed.
Authors: Alexander Melamed; Anthony E Rizzo; Roni Nitecki; Allison A Gockley; Amy J Bregar; John O Schorge; Marcela G Del Carmen; J Alejandro Rauh-Hain Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2017-07 Impact factor: 7.661
Authors: Jeanne Carter; Dennis S Chi; Carol L Brown; Nadeem R Abu-Rustum; Yukio Sonoda; Carol Aghajanian; Douglas A Levine; Raymond E Baser; Leigh Raviv; Richard R Barakat Journal: Int J Gynecol Cancer Date: 2010-01 Impact factor: 3.437
Authors: Alan C Schlaerth; Dennis S Chi; Elizabeth A Poynor; Richard R Barakat; Carol L Brown Journal: Int J Gynecol Cancer Date: 2009-10 Impact factor: 3.437
Authors: Chloe E Barr; Garth Funston; David Jeevan; Sudha Sundar; Luke T A Mounce; Emma J Crosbie Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2022-04-24 Impact factor: 6.575