Eduardo A Lacayo1, Sara Velayati2, Ahmed Elsakka2, Lynn Brody2, Joseph P Erinjeri2, Etay Ziv2, Franz E Boas2, Constantinos T Sofocleous2, Mikhail Silk3, Vicky Makker4, William P Tew4, Hooman Yarmohammadi2. 1. Department of Radiology, Interventional Radiology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York. Electronic address: eduardo-lacayo@smh.com. 2. Department of Radiology, Interventional Radiology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York. 3. Department of Radiology, Division of Interventional Radiology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia. 4. Department of Medicine, Gynecologic Medical Oncology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of 2 locoregional therapies (LRTs) including hepatic artery embolization (HAE) and transarterial radioembolization (TARE) in the treatment of patients with metastatic ovarian cancer to the liver. MATERIAL AND METHODS: From October 2010 to May 2019, the data of 15 consecutive patients (median age, 54 years ± 9.8; range, 35-78 years) with hepatic metastatic ovarian cancer who were treated with either HAE (n = 6; 40%) or TARE (n = 9; 60%) were reviewed. The most common histopathologic type was epithelial ovarian carcinoma (80%). The most common chemotherapy regimens used prior to embolization included carboplatin, paclitaxel, cisplatin, and bevacizumab. Patients received a mean of 4 lines ± 3 (range, 1-9) of chemotherapy. All patients with serous carcinoma were resistant to platinum at the time of embolization. Indications for embolization were progression of disease to the liver while receiving chemotherapy in 14 (93.3%) patients and palliative pain control in 1 patient. RESULTS: The overall response rates at 1, 3, and 6 months were 92.4%, 85.6%, and 70%, respectively. Median overall survival from the time of LRT was 9 (95% confidence interval [CI], 4-14) months. Median local tumor progression was 6.4 months ± 5.03 (95% CI, 3.3-9.5). No grade 3-5 adverse events were detected in either group. CONCLUSIONS: HAE and TARE were well tolerated in patients with metastatic ovarian cancer to the liver and possibly ensured prolonged disease control in heavily treated, predominantly in patients resistant to platinum. Larger numbers are needed to verify these data.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of 2 locoregional therapies (LRTs) including hepatic artery embolization (HAE) and transarterial radioembolization (TARE) in the treatment of patients with metastatic ovarian cancer to the liver. MATERIAL AND METHODS: From October 2010 to May 2019, the data of 15 consecutive patients (median age, 54 years ± 9.8; range, 35-78 years) with hepatic metastatic ovarian cancer who were treated with either HAE (n = 6; 40%) or TARE (n = 9; 60%) were reviewed. The most common histopathologic type was epithelial ovarian carcinoma (80%). The most common chemotherapy regimens used prior to embolization included carboplatin, paclitaxel, cisplatin, and bevacizumab. Patients received a mean of 4 lines ± 3 (range, 1-9) of chemotherapy. All patients with serous carcinoma were resistant to platinum at the time of embolization. Indications for embolization were progression of disease to the liver while receiving chemotherapy in 14 (93.3%) patients and palliative pain control in 1 patient. RESULTS: The overall response rates at 1, 3, and 6 months were 92.4%, 85.6%, and 70%, respectively. Median overall survival from the time of LRT was 9 (95% confidence interval [CI], 4-14) months. Median local tumor progression was 6.4 months ± 5.03 (95% CI, 3.3-9.5). No grade 3-5 adverse events were detected in either group. CONCLUSIONS: HAE and TARE were well tolerated in patients with metastatic ovarian cancer to the liver and possibly ensured prolonged disease control in heavily treated, predominantly in patients resistant to platinum. Larger numbers are needed to verify these data.
Authors: Thomas J Vogl; Nagy N N Naguib; Thomas Lehnert; Nour-Eldin A Nour-Eldin; Katrin Eichler; Stephan Zangos; Tatjana Gruber-Rouh Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2011-11-09 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: J Prat; H Belhadj; J Berek; A Bermudez; N Bhatla; J Cain; L Denny; K Fujiwara; N Hacker; E Avall-Lundqvist; D Mutch; F Odicino; S Pecorelli; M Quinn; M A-F Seoud; S K Shrivastava Journal: Eur J Gynaecol Oncol Date: 2015 Impact factor: 0.196
Authors: Samdeep K Mouli; Ramona Gupta; Neil Sheth; Andrew C Gordon; Robert J Lewandowski Journal: Semin Intervent Radiol Date: 2018-04-05 Impact factor: 1.513
Authors: Kimberly D Miller; Leticia Nogueira; Angela B Mariotto; Julia H Rowland; K Robin Yabroff; Catherine M Alfano; Ahmedin Jemal; Joan L Kramer; Rebecca L Siegel Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2019-06-11 Impact factor: 508.702
Authors: Kent T Sato; Robert J Lewandowski; Mary F Mulcahy; Bassel Atassi; Robert K Ryu; Vanessa L Gates; Albert A Nemcek; Omar Barakat; Al Benson; Robert Mandal; Mark Talamonti; Ching-Yee O Wong; Frank H Miller; Steven B Newman; John M Shaw; Kenneth G Thurston; Reed A Omary; Riad Salem Journal: Radiology Date: 2008-03-18 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Oguz Akin; Evis Sala; Chaya S Moskowitz; Nicole Ishill; Robert A Soslow; Dennis S Chi; Hedvig Hricak Journal: Radiology Date: 2008-06-02 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: S Grozinsky-Glasberg; G Kaltsas; M Kaltsatou; N Lev-Cohain; A Klimov; V Vergadis; I Uri; A I Bloom; D J Gross Journal: Endocrine Date: 2018-01-30 Impact factor: 3.633
Authors: Karen T Brown; Richard K Do; Mithat Gonen; Anne M Covey; George I Getrajdman; Constantinos T Sofocleous; William R Jarnagin; Michael I D'Angelica; Peter J Allen; Joseph P Erinjeri; Lynn A Brody; Gerald P O'Neill; Kristian N Johnson; Alessandra R Garcia; Christopher Beattie; Binsheng Zhao; Stephen B Solomon; Lawrence H Schwartz; Ronald DeMatteo; Ghassan K Abou-Alfa Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2016-02-01 Impact factor: 44.544