Christianne Persenaire1, Adam Pyrzak2, Emma L Barber3. 1. Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine (Drs. Persenaire, Pyrzak, and Barber), Chicago, Illinois. Electronic address: christianne.persenaire@cuanschutz.edu. 2. Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine (Drs. Persenaire, Pyrzak, and Barber), Chicago, Illinois. 3. Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine (Drs. Persenaire, Pyrzak, and Barber), Chicago, Illinois; Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center, Northwestern University (Dr. Barber), Chicago, Illinois; Surgical Outcomes and Quality Improvement Center, Institute for Public Health in Medicine (Dr. Barber), Chicago, Illinois.
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of surgical approach on overall survival (OS) for women with advanced, epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) and determine the sociodemographic and clinical factors associated with surgical approach. DESIGN: The primary exposure was surgical approach to interval cytoreduction, minimally invasive versus open, and was evaluated by intention to treat. Primary outcome was OS. Associations were examined using Chi-squared tests, Wilcoxon rank sum tests, and multivariate logistic regression. Survival analysis was performed with Kaplan-Meier methods and Cox proportional hazards. SETTING: The National Cander Database was used to identify eligible patients. PATIENTS: Women diagnosed with stage IIIC/IV EOC from 2010-2016. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were included if they were treated with NACT within 90 days of diagnosis before interval cytoreductive surgery (CRS). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A total of 8085 women were identified; 6713 (83%) underwent open interval CRS, and 1372 (17%) underwent minimally invasive interval CRS. The proportion undergoing minimally invasive CRS after NACT increased from 2% in 2010 to 11% in 2016, a nearly 6-fold increase. There was no difference in OS between women who underwent minimally invasive and open interval CRS (median OS 36.5 vs 35.2 months, HR 0.94, 95% CI, 0.86-1.04). After adjusting for demographic and clinical variables, including age, race, ethnicity, income, and Charlson/Deyo score, no difference in OS was observed (HR 0.95, 95% CI, 0.86-1.04). Women of older age (OR 1.35, 95% CI, 1.05-1.74) and Hispanic ethnicity (OR 1.46, 95% CI, 1.14-1.88) had increased odds of receiving minimally invasive CRS after NACT, whereas low income (<$38000/year) women had decreased odds (OR 0.76, 95% CI, 0.60-0.97, p = .03). Length of stay differed for patients undergoing minimally invasive versus open interval CRS (3 vs 5 days, p <.01), but there was no difference in need for postoperative readmission. CONCLUSIONS: Minimally invasive CRS has similar survival outcomes to open CRS among women with EOC who have undergone NACT.
STUDY OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of surgical approach on overall survival (OS) for women with advanced, epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) and determine the sociodemographic and clinical factors associated with surgical approach. DESIGN: The primary exposure was surgical approach to interval cytoreduction, minimally invasive versus open, and was evaluated by intention to treat. Primary outcome was OS. Associations were examined using Chi-squared tests, Wilcoxon rank sum tests, and multivariate logistic regression. Survival analysis was performed with Kaplan-Meier methods and Cox proportional hazards. SETTING: The National Cander Database was used to identify eligible patients. PATIENTS: Women diagnosed with stage IIIC/IV EOC from 2010-2016. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were included if they were treated with NACT within 90 days of diagnosis before interval cytoreductive surgery (CRS). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A total of 8085 women were identified; 6713 (83%) underwent open interval CRS, and 1372 (17%) underwent minimally invasive interval CRS. The proportion undergoing minimally invasive CRS after NACT increased from 2% in 2010 to 11% in 2016, a nearly 6-fold increase. There was no difference in OS between women who underwent minimally invasive and open interval CRS (median OS 36.5 vs 35.2 months, HR 0.94, 95% CI, 0.86-1.04). After adjusting for demographic and clinical variables, including age, race, ethnicity, income, and Charlson/Deyo score, no difference in OS was observed (HR 0.95, 95% CI, 0.86-1.04). Women of older age (OR 1.35, 95% CI, 1.05-1.74) and Hispanic ethnicity (OR 1.46, 95% CI, 1.14-1.88) had increased odds of receiving minimally invasive CRS after NACT, whereas low income (<$38000/year) women had decreased odds (OR 0.76, 95% CI, 0.60-0.97, p = .03). Length of stay differed for patients undergoing minimally invasive versus open interval CRS (3 vs 5 days, p <.01), but there was no difference in need for postoperative readmission. CONCLUSIONS: Minimally invasive CRS has similar survival outcomes to open CRS among women with EOC who have undergone NACT.
Authors: Sean Kehoe; Jane Hook; Matthew Nankivell; Gordon C Jayson; Henry Kitchener; Tito Lopes; David Luesley; Timothy Perren; Selina Bannoo; Monica Mascarenhas; Stephen Dobbs; Sharadah Essapen; Jeremy Twigg; Jonathan Herod; Glenn McCluggage; Mahesh Parmar; Ann-Marie Swart Journal: Lancet Date: 2015-05-19 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Ignace Vergote; Claes G Tropé; Frédéric Amant; Gunnar B Kristensen; Tom Ehlen; Nick Johnson; René H M Verheijen; Maria E L van der Burg; Angel J Lacave; Pierluigi Benedetti Panici; Gemma G Kenter; Antonio Casado; Cesar Mendiola; Corneel Coens; Leen Verleye; Gavin C E Stuart; Sergio Pecorelli; Nick S Reed Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2010-09-02 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Monika Janda; Val Gebski; Lucy C Davies; Peta Forder; Alison Brand; Russell Hogg; Thomas W Jobling; Russell Land; Tom Manolitsas; Marcelo Nascimento; Deborah Neesham; James L Nicklin; Martin K Oehler; Geoff Otton; Lewis Perrin; Stuart Salfinger; Ian Hammond; Yee Leung; Peter Sykes; Hextan Ngan; Andrea Garrett; Michael Laney; Tong Yow Ng; Karfai Tam; Karen Chan; C David Wrede; Selvan Pather; Bryony Simcock; Rhonda Farrell; Gregory Robertson; Graeme Walker; Nigel R Armfield; Nick Graves; Anthony J McCartney; Andreas Obermair Journal: JAMA Date: 2017-03-28 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Alexander Melamed; Roni Nitecki; David M Boruta; Marcela G Del Carmen; Rachel M Clark; Whitfield B Growdon; Annekathryn Goodman; John O Schorge; J Alejandro Rauh-Hain Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2017-05 Impact factor: 7.661
Authors: Jubilee Brown; Lane Drury; Erin K Crane; William E Anderson; David L Tait; Robert V Higgins; R Wendel Naumann Journal: J Minim Invasive Gynecol Date: 2018-09-18 Impact factor: 4.137