| Literature DB >> 35647161 |
Ling-Qin Zhao1, Wen Gao1, Ping Zhang1, Ying-Li Zhang1, Chen-Yan Fang1, Hua-Feng Shou2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Ovarian cancer is one of the three most common malignant tumors of the female reproductive tract and ranks first in terms of mortality among gynecological tumors. Epithelial ovarian carcinoma (EOC) is the most common ovarian malignancy, accounting for 90% of all primary ovarian tumors. The clinical value of cytoreductive surgery in patients with platinum-resistant recurrent EOC remains largely unclear. AIM: To evaluate the feasibility of secondary cytoreductive surgery for treating platinum-resistant recurrent EOC.Entities:
Keywords: Carcinoma; Cisplatin; Drug resistance; Neoplasm; Ovarian epithelial; Surgical treatment
Year: 2022 PMID: 35647161 PMCID: PMC9100723 DOI: 10.12998/wjcc.v10.i12.3739
Source DB: PubMed Journal: World J Clin Cases ISSN: 2307-8960 Impact factor: 1.534
Patient baseline characteristics
|
|
|
| Age, | |
| < 50 yrs | 18 (47.4) |
| ≥ 50 yrs | 20 (52.6) |
| Pathological type, | |
| High-grade serous carcinoma | 26 (68.4) |
| Endometrioid carcinoma | 5 (13.2) |
| Clear cell carcinoma | 5 (13.2) |
| Mucinous carcinoma | 1 (2.6) |
| Mixed type | 1 (2.6) |
| Pathological classification, | |
| Highly differentiated | 3 (7.9) |
| Moderately differentiated | 3 (7.9) |
| Poorly differentiated | 32 (84.2) |
| Number of previous surgery, | |
| 0 | 1 (2.6) |
| 1 | 32 (84.2) |
| 2 | 4 (10.6) |
| 3 | 1 (2.6) |
| Number of previous chemotherapy lines, | |
| 1 | 24 (63.1) |
| 2 | 8 (21.1) |
| ≥ 3 | 6 (15.8) |
| FIGO staging of the first surgery, | |
| I | 2 (5.3) |
| II | 12 (31.5) |
| III | 22 (57.9) |
| IV | 2 (5.3) |
| Residual lesions of the first surgery, | |
| R0 | 20 (52.6) |
| R1 | 10 (26.3) |
| R2 | 8 (21.1) |
| Neoadjuvant chemotherapy, | 9 (23.7) |
| Remission time of chemotherapy before this secondary surgery, | |
| ≤ 3 mo | 16 (42.1) |
| 3-6 mo | 22 (57.9) |
| Type of platinum resistance, | |
| Secondary | 27 (71.1) |
| Primary | 11 (28.9) |
FIGO: International federation of gynecology and obstetrics.
Data of secondary surgery for platinum-resistant recurrent epithelial ovarian carcinoma
|
|
|
| Preoperative ECOG score, | |
| 0-1 | 33 (86.8) |
| 2 | 5 (13.2) |
| Location of recurrent lesions, | |
| Pelvic cavity | 7 (18.4) |
| Abdominopelvic cavity | 16 (42.1) |
| Pelvic/abdominal cavity + retroperitoneal | 15 (39.5) |
| Residual lesions of the secondary surgery, | |
| R0 | 25 (65.8) |
| R1-R2 | 13 (34.2) |
| Intraoperative organ resection, | |
| No | 13 (34.2) |
| Yes | 25 (65.8) |
| Bleeding amount (mL), | |
| ≤ 400 | 20 (52.6) |
| 401-800 | 12 (31.6) |
| > 801 | 6 (15.8) |
| Perioperative complications, | |
| No | 29 (76.3) |
| Yes | 9 (23.7) |
| Postoperative chemotherapy, | |
| No | 2 (5.3) |
| Yes | 36 (94.7) |
| Postoperative use of targeted drugs, | |
| No | 33 (86.8) |
| Yes | 5 (13.2) |
| Postoperative hospital stay, | |
| ≤ 10 d | 24 (63.2) |
| 11-20 d | 12 (31.6) |
| > 20 d | 2 (5.2) |
ECOG: Eastern collaborative oncology group.
Figure 1Survival curves. A: Progression-free survival (PFS); B: Overall survival (OS); C: Chemotherapy-free interval (CFI) after secondary surgery for platinum-resistant recurrent epithelial ovarian carcinoma. Median PFS was 10 (95%CI: 8.27-11.73) months. Median OS was 28 (95%CI: 12.75-43.25) months. Median CFI was 9 (95%CI: 8.06-9.94) months.
Univariable Cox regression analysis of various outcomes
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Age | |||||||||
| < 50 yrs | 0.929 | (0.469, 1.839) | 0.832 | 0.684 | (0.276, 1.694) | 0.412 | 1.06 | (0.538, 2.092) | 0.866 |
| ≥ 50 yrs | Reference | Reference | Reference | ||||||
| Pathological type | |||||||||
| High-grade serous carcinoma | Reference | Reference | Reference | ||||||
| Endometrioid carcinoma | 0.523 | (0.178, 1.543) | 0.241 | 0.697 | (0.199, 2.439) | 0.572 | 0.32 | (0.107, 0.956) | 0.041 |
| Clear cell carcinoma | 1.107 | (0.417, 2.942) | 0.838 | 0.788 | (0.224, 2.769) | 0.71 | 0.991 | (0.368, 2.67) | 0.985 |
| Mucinous carcinoma | 0.491 | (0.065, 3.706) | 0.491 | 1.957 | (0.249, 15.399) | 0.524 | 0.238 | (0.031, 1.849) | 0.17 |
| Mixed type | 6.929 | (0.803, 59.809) | 0.078 | 11.285 | (1.157, 110.099) | 0.037 | 2.559 | (0.327, 20.016) | 0.371 |
| Pathological classification | |||||||||
| Highly differentiated | 0.822 | (0.249, 2.713) | 0.748 | 1.427 | (0.413, 4.931) | 0.574 | 0.644 | (0.193, 2.154) | 0.475 |
| Moderately differentiated | 0.583 | (0.137, 2.474) | 0.464 | 0.878 | (0.198, 3.881) | 0.863 | 0.348 | (0.082, 1.477) | 0.152 |
| Poorly differentiated | Reference | Reference | Reference | ||||||
| Number of previous surgery | |||||||||
| 0 | 3.676 | (0.464, 29.112) | 0.218 | 6.505 | (0.755, 56.05) | 0.088 | 8.71 | (0.969, 78.245) | 0.053 |
| 1 | Reference | Reference | Reference | ||||||
| 2 | 0.807 | (0.276, 2.358) | 0.696 | 0.961 | (0.223, 4.151) | 0.958 | 1.02 | (0.351, 2.964) | 0.97 |
| 3 | 0.922 | (0.124, 6.864) | 0.937 | / | / | / | 1.251 | (0.167, 9.374) | 0.827 |
| Number of previous chemotherapy lines | |||||||||
| 1 | Reference | Reference | Reference | ||||||
| 2 | 0.639 | (0.272, 1.504) | 0.305 | 0.573 | (0.165, 1.987) | 0.381 | 0.974 | (0.426, 2.229) | 0.951 |
| ≥ 3 | 0.81 | (0.307, 2.142) | 0.672 | 1.863 | (0.592, 5.865) | 0.288 | 1.182 | (0.476, 2.935) | 0.719 |
| FIGO staging of the first surgery | |||||||||
| I | 1.507 | (0.345, 6.58) | 0.586 | 1.634 | (0.358, 7.466) | 0.526 | 2.678 | (0.577, 12.437) | 0.209 |
| II | 0.752 | (0.352, 1.606) | 0.462 | 1.244 | (0.512, 3.027) | 0.63 | 0.672 | (0.319, 1.415) | 0.295 |
| III | Reference | Reference | Reference | ||||||
| IV | 0.419 | (0.097, 1.819) | 0.246 | / | / | / | 0.525 | (0.12, 2.285) | 0.39 |
| Residual lesions of the first surgery | |||||||||
| R0 | Reference | Reference | Reference | ||||||
| R1 | 1.122 | (0.505, 2.49) | 0.778 | 0.936 | (0.355, 2.469) | 0.894 | 1.059 | (0.484, 2.32) | 0.885 |
| R2 | 1.071 | (0.461, 2.489) | 0.874 | 0.422 | (0.119, 1.492) | 0.181 | 1.055 | (0.454, 2.456) | 0.9 |
| Neoadjuvant chemotherapy | 0.629 | (0.278,1.423) | 0.266 | 1.081 | (0.394, 2.965) | 0.879 | 0.717 | (0.329, 1.56) | 0.401 |
| Remission time of chemotherapy before this secondary surgery | |||||||||
| ≤ 3 mo | 1.338 | (0.68, 2.631) | 0.399 | 0.767 | (0.322, 1.827) | 0.549 | 1.022 | (0.519, 2.014) | 0.95 |
| 3-6 mo | Reference | Reference | Reference | ||||||
| Type of platinum resistance | |||||||||
| Secondary | Reference | Reference | Reference | ||||||
| Primary | 0.982 | (0.471, 2.048) | 0.962 | 0.843 | (0.281, 2.529) | 0.761 | 1.354 | (0.647, 2.833) | 0.421 |
| Preoperative ECOG score | |||||||||
| 0-1 | Reference | Reference | Reference | ||||||
| 2 | 0.643 | (0.226, 1.830) | 0.408 | 0.654 | (0.184, 2.323) | 0.511 | 0.575 | (0.221, 1.497) | 0.257 |
| Location of recurrent lesions | |||||||||
| Pelvic cavity | 0.799 | (0.305, 2.091) | 0.648 | 0.981 | (0.314, 3.062) | 0.973 | 0.661 | (0.239, 1.827) | 0.425 |
| Abdominopelvic cavity | Reference | Reference | Reference | ||||||
| Pelvic/abdominal cavity + retroperitoneal | 0.818 | (0.391, 1.711) | 0.594 | 0.728 | (0.279, 1.9) | 0.516 | 0.867 | (0.422, 1.78) | 0.697 |
| Residual lesions of this secondary surgery | |||||||||
| R0 | Reference | Reference | Reference | ||||||
| R1-R2 | 3.29 | (1.511, 7.162) | 0.003 | 2.65 | (1.115, 6.298) | 0.027 | 2.777 | (1.108, 4.679) | 0.025 |
| Intraoperative organ resection | 1.251 | (0.616, 2.542) | 0.536 | 1.19 | (0.485, 2.921) | 0.705 | 1.586 | (0.772, 3.257) | 0.21 |
| Bleeding amount | |||||||||
| ≤ 400 mL | Reference | Reference | Reference | ||||||
| 401-800 mL | 0.668 | (0.309, 1.444) | 0.305 | 0.634 | (0.222, 1.807) | 0.393 | 0.963 | (0.459, 2.021) | 0.92 |
| > 800 mL | 2.862 | (1.048, 7.813) | 0.04 | 2.422 | (0.83, 7.072) | 0.106 | 1.601 | (0.623, 4.111) | 0.328 |
| Perioperative complications | 0.669 | (0.289, 1.548) | 0.348 | 1.355 | (0.527, 3.478) | 0.528 | 0.713 | (0.307, 1.656) | 0.432 |
| Postoperative chemotherapy | |||||||||
| No | 5.027 | (1.061, 23.828) | 0.042 | 57.66 | (5.099, 651.995) | 0.001 | / | / | / |
| Yes | Reference | Reference | / | / | / | ||||
| Postoperative use of targeted drugs | 0.518 | (0.178, 1.504) | 0.226 | 0.436 | (0.101, 1.887) | 0.267 | 0.745 | (0.277, 2.003) | 0.56 |
| Postoperative hospital stay | |||||||||
| ≤ 10 d | Reference | Reference | Reference | ||||||
| 11-20 d | 1.212 | (0.573, 2.567) | 0.615 | 2.411 | (0.963, 6.037) | 0.06 | 1.104 | (0.524, 2.328) | 0.795 |
| > 20 d | 1.911 | (0.44, 8.308) | 0.388 | 3.98 | (0.853, 18.563) | 0.079 | 3.246 | (0.695, 15.154) | 0.134 |
OS: Overall survival; PFS: Progression-free survival; CFI: Chemotherapy-free interval; HR: Hazard ratio; CI: Confidence interval; FIGO: International federation of gynecology and obstetrics; ECOG: Eastern collaborative oncology group.
Figure 2Kaplan-Meier survival curves for subgroup analysis of progression-free survival. The absence of residual lesions after cytoreductive surgery (P = 0.001) and postoperative chemotherapy (P = 0.018) were associated with improved progression-free survival. A: Age (P = 0.824); B: Eastern collaborative oncology group score (P = 0.381); C: Pathological type (P = 0.114); D: Tumor differentiation (P = 0.708); E: Absence of residual lesions after cytoreductive surgery (P = 0.001); F: Postoperative chemotherapy (P = 0.018); G: Number of chemotherapy lines (P = 0.542); H: The number of previous surgeries (P = 0.543); I: Targeted drugs (P = 0.196). ECOG: Eastern collaborative oncology group.
Figure 4Kaplan-Meier survival curves for subgroup analysis of chemotherapy-free interval. The absence of residual lesions after cytoreductive surgery (P = 0.013) was associated with improved chemotherapy-free interval. A: Age (P = 0.852); B: Eastern collaborative oncology group score (P = 0.200); C: Pathological type (P = 0.071); D: Tumor differentiation (P = 0.200); E: Residual lesions after cytoreductive surgery (P = 0.013); F: Number of chemotherapy lines (P = 0.909); G: The number of previous surgeries (P = 0.142); H: Targeted drugs (P = 0.508). ECOG: Eastern collaborative oncology group.
Figure 3Kaplan-Meier survival curves for subgroup analysis of overall survival. The absence of residual lesions after cytoreductive surgery (P = 0.021) and postoperative chemotherapy (P < 0.001) were associated with improved overall survival. A: Age (P = 0.405); B: Eastern collaborative oncology group score (P = 0.505); C: Pathological type (P = 0.079); D: Tumor differentiation (P = 0.826); E: Absence of residual lesions after cytoreductive surgery (P = 0.021); F: Postoperative chemotherapy (P < 0.001); G: the number of chemotherapy lines (P = 0.296); H: The number of previous surgeries (P = 0.230); I: Targeted drugs (P = 0.249). ECOG: Eastern collaborative oncology group.