Background: Whether patients with advanced tubo-ovarian high-grade serous cancer (HGSC) fare better after upfront debulking surgery (UDS) or neoadjuvant chemotherapy with interval debulking surgery (NACT-IDS) remains controversial. Methods: We studied patients with HGSC who underwent UDS or NACT-IDS between July 2000 and December 2015, with peritonectomy procedures combined with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). Clinical reports were included peritoneal cancer index (PCI), NACT responses, surgical complexity score (SCS), completeness of cytoreduction (CC), complete follow-up with timing, site, and treatment of recurrence. Outcome measures were morbidity, progression-free survival (PFS), PFS2, and overall survival during a mean 5-year follow-up. Results: A total of 34 patients (23.6%) underwent UDS and 110 (76.4%) NACT-IDS both combined with HIPEC. At a median 66.3-month follow-up, patients who underwent UDS or NACT-IDS had similar outcomes. NACT subgroup responses correlated with PCI, SCS, morbidity, and CC. Patients who underwent UDS had lower recurrence rates than those who responded partly or poorly to NACT (PFS, P <.04; PFS2, P <.01). Despite HIPEC, the peritoneal disease recurred in 42.5% of the overall patients. Conclusion: In patients with primary HGSC who undergo UDS or NACT-IDS, despite similar outcomes, peritonectomy procedures combined with HIPEC seem unable to prevent peritoneal recurrence.

Upfront debulking surgery versus interval debulking surgery for advanced tubo-ovarian high-grade serous carcinoma and diffuse peritoneal metastases treated with peritonectomy procedures plus HIPEC

Ansaloni L.;
2019-01-01

Abstract

Background: Whether patients with advanced tubo-ovarian high-grade serous cancer (HGSC) fare better after upfront debulking surgery (UDS) or neoadjuvant chemotherapy with interval debulking surgery (NACT-IDS) remains controversial. Methods: We studied patients with HGSC who underwent UDS or NACT-IDS between July 2000 and December 2015, with peritonectomy procedures combined with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). Clinical reports were included peritoneal cancer index (PCI), NACT responses, surgical complexity score (SCS), completeness of cytoreduction (CC), complete follow-up with timing, site, and treatment of recurrence. Outcome measures were morbidity, progression-free survival (PFS), PFS2, and overall survival during a mean 5-year follow-up. Results: A total of 34 patients (23.6%) underwent UDS and 110 (76.4%) NACT-IDS both combined with HIPEC. At a median 66.3-month follow-up, patients who underwent UDS or NACT-IDS had similar outcomes. NACT subgroup responses correlated with PCI, SCS, morbidity, and CC. Patients who underwent UDS had lower recurrence rates than those who responded partly or poorly to NACT (PFS, P <.04; PFS2, P <.01). Despite HIPEC, the peritoneal disease recurred in 42.5% of the overall patients. Conclusion: In patients with primary HGSC who undergo UDS or NACT-IDS, despite similar outcomes, peritonectomy procedures combined with HIPEC seem unable to prevent peritoneal recurrence.
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11571/1348210
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 4
  • Scopus 14
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 14
social impact