PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare the progression-free and overall survivals of women with advanced ovarian cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery with those treated conventionally with cytoreductive surgery followed by cytotoxic chemotherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-nine consecutive women with advanced malignancies compatible with ovarian cancer based on (1) physical examinations, (2) computerized tomography scans, and (3) cytologic or histologic specimens and treated with platinum-based combination chemotherapy, i.e., neoadjuvant chemotherapy, were retrospectively reviewed. Forty-one subsequently underwent cytoreductive surgery. Their overall and progression-free survivals were compared to those of 206 consecutive women with Stage IIIC and IV epithelial ovarian cancers treated with conventional cytoreductive surgery followed by platinum-based combination chemotherapy during the same era. RESULTS: No statistical difference was observed in overall survival (P = 0.1578) or in progression-free survival between the group treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and the conventionally treated group (P = 0.5327) despite the neoadjuvant chemotherapy patients being statistically older (median age 67 years [range 44 to 85 years] vs a median age of 60 years [range 19 to 79 years] for conventionally treated patients; P < 0. 001) and having a statistically poorer performance status (P < 0. 001) than the conventionally treated group. Women undergoing cytoreductive surgery following neoadjuvant chemotherapy had a statistically improved overall survival (P < 0.0001) compared to those who did not undergo surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy does not compromise the survival of women treated for advanced ovarian cancer. Prospective randomized trials comparing neoadjuvant chemotherapy to conventional therapy to determine quality of life experiences and cost/benefit outcomes are now appropriate for women presenting with advanced ovarian cancer. Copyright 1999 Academic Press.
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare the progression-free and overall survivals of women with advanced ovarian cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery with those treated conventionally with cytoreductive surgery followed by cytotoxic chemotherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-nine consecutive women with advanced malignancies compatible with ovarian cancer based on (1) physical examinations, (2) computerized tomography scans, and (3) cytologic or histologic specimens and treated with platinum-based combination chemotherapy, i.e., neoadjuvant chemotherapy, were retrospectively reviewed. Forty-one subsequently underwent cytoreductive surgery. Their overall and progression-free survivals were compared to those of 206 consecutive women with Stage IIIC and IV epithelial ovarian cancers treated with conventional cytoreductive surgery followed by platinum-based combination chemotherapy during the same era. RESULTS: No statistical difference was observed in overall survival (P = 0.1578) or in progression-free survival between the group treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and the conventionally treated group (P = 0.5327) despite the neoadjuvant chemotherapy patients being statistically older (median age 67 years [range 44 to 85 years] vs a median age of 60 years [range 19 to 79 years] for conventionally treated patients; P < 0. 001) and having a statistically poorer performance status (P < 0. 001) than the conventionally treated group. Women undergoing cytoreductive surgery following neoadjuvant chemotherapy had a statistically improved overall survival (P < 0.0001) compared to those who did not undergo surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy does not compromise the survival of women treated for advanced ovarian cancer. Prospective randomized trials comparing neoadjuvant chemotherapy to conventional therapy to determine quality of life experiences and cost/benefit outcomes are now appropriate for women presenting with advanced ovarian cancer. Copyright 1999 Academic Press.
Authors: Jocelyn M Stewart; Alicia A Tone; Haiyan Jiang; Marcus Q Bernardini; Sarah Ferguson; Stephane Laframboise; K Joan Murphy; Barry Rosen; Taymaa May Journal: Can J Surg Date: 2016-08 Impact factor: 2.089
Authors: Melissa M Thrall; Heidi J Gray; Rebecca Gaston Symons; Noel S Weiss; David R Flum; Barbara A Goff Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2011-09-26 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: U Wagner; P Harter; F Hilpert; S Mahner; A Reuß; A du Bois; E Petru; W Meier; P Ortner; K König; K Lindel; D Grab; P Piso; O Ortmann; I Runnebaum; J Pfisterer; D Lüftner; N Frickhofen; F Grünwald; B O Maier; J Diebold; S Hauptmann; F Kommoss; G Emons; B Radeleff; M Gebhardt; N Arnold; G Calaminus; I Weisse; J Weis; J Sehouli; D Fink; A Burges; A Hasenburg; C Eggert Journal: Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd Date: 2013-09 Impact factor: 2.915
Authors: Jason D Wright; Cande V Ananth; Jennifer Tsui; Sherry A Glied; William M Burke; Yu-Shiang Lu; Alfred I Neugut; Thomas J Herzog; Dawn L Hershman Journal: Cancer Date: 2014-01-17 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Mohamed A F Hegazy; Refaat A F Hegazi; Mohamed A Elshafei; Ahmed E Setit; Maged R Elshamy; Mohamed Eltatoongy; Amal A F Halim Journal: World J Surg Oncol Date: 2005-08-31 Impact factor: 2.754