Ying L Liu 1 , Qin C Zhou 2 , Alexia Iasonos 2 , Dennis S Chi 3 , Oliver Zivanovic 3 , Yukio Sonoda 3 , Ginger Gardner 3 , Vance Broach 3 , Roisin O'Cearbhaill 1 , Jason A Konner 1 , Rachel Grisham 1 , Carol A Aghajanian 1 , Nadeem R Abu-Rustum 3 , William Tew 1 , Kara Long Roche 4 Show Affiliations »
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Although trials of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in ovarian cancer use 3 neoadjuvant cycles, real-world practice varies. We sought to evaluate the influence of increasing pre-operative cycles on survival, accounting for surgical outcomes. METHODS: We identified 199 women with newly diagnosed ovarian cancer recommended for neoadjuvant chemotherapy who underwent interval debulking surgery from July 2015 to December 2018. Non-parametric tests were used to compare clinical characteristics by neoadjuvant cycles. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate differences in progression-free and overall survival. The log-rank test was used to assess the relationship of covariates to outcome. RESULTS: The median number of neoadjuvant cycles was 4 (range 3-8), with 56 (28%) women receiving ≥5 cycles. Compared with those receiving 3 or 4, women with ≥5 neoadjuvant cycles received fewer or no post-operative cycles (p<0.001) but had no other differences in clinical factors (p>0.05). Complete gross resection rates were similar among those receiving 3, 4, and ≥5 neoadjuvant cycles (68.5%, 70%, and 71.4%, respectively, p=0.96). There were no significant differences in progression-free or overall survival when comparing 3 versus 4 neoadjuvant cycles. However, more cycles (≥5 vs 4) were associated with worse progression-free survival, even after adjustment for BRCA status and complete gross resection (HR 2.20, 95% CI 1.45 to 3.33, p<0.001), and worse overall survival, even after adjustment for histology, response on imaging, and complete gross resection rates (HR 2.78, 95% CI 1.37 to 5.63, p=0.016). The most common reason for receiving ≥5 cycles was extent of disease requiring more neoadjuvant chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Despite maximal cytoreduction, patients receiving ≥5 neoadjuvant cycles have a poorer prognosis than those receiving 3-4 cycles. Future studies should focus on reducing surgical morbidity and optimizing novel therapies in this high-risk group. © IGCS and ESGO 2020. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
OBJECTIVE: Although trials of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in ovarian cancer use 3 neoadjuvant cycles, real-world practice varies. We sought to evaluate the influence of increasing pre-operative cycles on survival, accounting for surgical outcomes. METHODS: We identified 199 women with newly diagnosed ovarian cancer recommended for neoadjuvant chemotherapy who underwent interval debulking surgery from July 2015 to December 2018. Non-parametric tests were used to compare clinical characteristics by neoadjuvant cycles. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate differences in progression-free and overall survival. The log-rank test was used to assess the relationship of covariates to outcome. RESULTS: The median number of neoadjuvant cycles was 4 (range 3-8), with 56 (28%) women receiving ≥5 cycles. Compared with those receiving 3 or 4, women with ≥5 neoadjuvant cycles received fewer or no post-operative cycles (p<0.001) but had no other differences in clinical factors (p>0.05). Complete gross resection rates were similar among those receiving 3, 4, and ≥5 neoadjuvant cycles (68.5%, 70%, and 71.4%, respectively, p=0.96). There were no significant differences in progression-free or overall survival when comparing 3 versus 4 neoadjuvant cycles. However, more cycles (≥5 vs 4) were associated with worse progression-free survival, even after adjustment for BRCA status and complete gross resection (HR 2.20, 95% CI 1.45 to 3.33, p<0.001), and worse overall survival, even after adjustment for histology, response on imaging, and complete gross resection rates (HR 2.78, 95% CI 1.37 to 5.63, p=0.016). The most common reason for receiving ≥5 cycles was extent of disease requiring more neoadjuvant chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Despite maximal cytoreduction, patients receiving ≥5 neoadjuvant cycles have a poorer prognosis than those receiving 3-4 cycles. Future studies should focus on reducing surgical morbidity and optimizing novel therapies in this high-risk group. © IGCS and ESGO 2020. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Entities: Disease
Gene
Species
Keywords:
ovarian cancer
Year: 2020
PMID： 33106271 DOI： 10.1136/ijgc-2020-001641
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Gynecol Cancer ISSN： 1048-891X Impact factor: 3.437