Role of delayed interval debulking for persistent residual disease after more than 5 cycles of chemotherapy for primary advanced ovarian cancer. An international multicenter study

Survival after interval and delayed cytoreduction surgery in advanced ovarian cancer: a Global Gynaecological Oncology Surgical Outcomes Collaborative-Led Study (GO SOAR2)

OBJECTIVE

Although trials of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for ovarian cancer use 3 cycles, real world practice varies. We evaluated the effect of higher order cycles of chemotherapy, followed by cytoreduction surgery or no surgery on survival, tumor resectability, and post-operative morbidity.

METHODS

For our international, retrospective cohort study, the inclusion criteria were women with stage III to IV ovarian cancer undergoing interval (after 3-4 cycles of chemotherapy) or delayed (≥5 cycles) cytoreduction surgery or no cytoreduction surgery with chemotherapy alone (≥5 cycles). Multivariate regression analyses were used to model the effect of impact variables on overall survival and tumor resectability.

RESULTS

Data were collected from 2498 patients from 22 centers across 12 countries. In total, 60.2% (n = 1504) underwent interval cytoreduction surgery, 30.4% (n = 760) underwent delayed cytoreduction surgery, and 9.4% (n = 234) did not undergo surgery. In the interval, delayed, and no-surgery groups, the mean follow-up periods were 57, 69, and 39 months, respectively. Patients undergoing interval versus delayed cytoreduction were more likely to achieve no residual tumor mass (no macroscopic residual disease [R0] = 72.2%, 1072/1484; 64.6%, 490/758). Patients who underwent interval versus delayed cytoreduction surgery had a greater proportion of minor (Clavien-Dindo 1-2, 32%, 471/1473; 28%, 212/756) and major (Clavien-Dindo 3-5, 9.6%, 141/1473; 8.6%, 65/756) morbidities. Interval cytoreduction surgery was associated with statistically significant greater overall survival than delayed cytoreduction surgery (HR 0.81, p = .01). R0 at the time of delayed cytoreduction was not equivalent to R0 at the time of cytoreductive surgery. R0 in the interval setting was associated with better overall survival (HR 0.77, p = .01). Patients who did not undergo surgery had twice as poor overall survival compared with patients who underwent delayed cytoreduction surgery (HR 2.01, p < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Women receiving >4 neoadjuvant chemotherapy cycles had poorer overall survival, despite achieving R0 at surgery. Early maximum effort cytoreduction surgery with R0 in high volume centers and appropriate surgical resources are critical for increasing overall survival.

Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Newly Diagnosed, Advanced Ovarian Cancer: ASCO Guideline Update

PURPOSE

To provide updated guidance regarding neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) and primary cytoreductive surgery (PCS) among patients with stage III-IV epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer (epithelial ovarian cancer [EOC]).

METHODS

A multidisciplinary Expert Panel convened and updated the systematic review.

RESULTS

Sixty-one studies form the evidence base.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Patients with suspected stage III-IV EOC should be evaluated by a gynecologic oncologist, with cancer antigen 125, computed tomography of the abdomen and pelvis, and chest imaging included. All patients with EOC should be offered germline genetic and somatic testing at diagnosis. For patients with newly diagnosed advanced EOC who are fit for surgery and have a high likelihood of achieving complete cytoreduction, PCS is recommended. For patients fit for PCS but deemed unlikely to have complete cytoreduction, NACT is recommended. Patients with newly diagnosed advanced EOC and a high perioperative risk profile should receive NACT. Before NACT, patients should have histologic confirmation of invasive ovarian cancer. For NACT, a platinum-taxane doublet is recommended. Interval cytoreductive surgery (ICS) should be performed after ≤four cycles of NACT for patients with a response to chemotherapy or stable disease. For patients with stage III disease, good performance status, and adequate renal function treated with NACT, hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy may be offered during ICS. After ICS, chemotherapy should continue to complete a six-cycle treatment plan with the optional addition of bevacizumab. Patients with EOC should be offered US Food and Drug Administration-approved maintenance treatments. Patients with progressive disease on NACT should have diagnosis reconfirmed via tissue biopsy. Patients without previous comprehensive genetic or molecular profiling should be offered testing. Treatment options include alternative chemotherapy regimens, clinical trials, and/or initiation of end-of-life care.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/gynecologic-cancer-guidelines.This guideline has been endorsed by the Society of Gynecologic Oncology.

Oncological Outcomes in Patients with Delayed Cytoreductive Surgery During COVID Times

ESMO ESGO guidelines recommend standard 3-4 cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) for advanced epithelial ovarian cancers (EOC); however, the ideal number of cycles is still debatable. Literature regarding survival after 5 or more cycles is conflicting. COVID pandemic saw several oncosurgeries postponed due to healthcare crises. The present study was undertaken to evaluate oncological outcomes in patients undergoing delayed cytoreductive surgery (CRS) in advanced Epithelial Ovarian Cancer. This was a hospital-based, retrospective, observational study done at tertiary cancer institute. Objectives were to evaluate progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) according to timing of surgery and to identify prognostic factors for OS and PFS. The study group included patients undergoing delayed CRS (defined as CRS done after more than 5 cycles of NACT), and the control group is comprised of CRS done after 3-4 cycles NACT. A total of 29 patients underwent delayed CRS. Of these, 58% (n = 17) patients had COVID-related causes for delay in surgery. On comparing with the control group (n = 98), the study group had lower rates of complete cytoreduction (50% vs 71%, p = 0.012). Similarly complete chemotherapy response score was observed in lower proportion of delayed CRS (24.13% vs 28.15%, p = 0.003). Mean CA 125 levels were 89.32 and 148.45 in cases and controls respectively (p = 0.090). PFS of the patients with delayed CRS (7 months) versus the interval CRS group (16 months) showed a statistically significant difference between the two group (p = 0.0001). Also, the OS for the control group was longer (55 months) than cases (34 months) (p ≤ 0.0001). Administration of additional cycles of chemotherapy beyond 3-4 cycles seemed to decrease survival in Ovarian Cancer patients. This approach however, may be beneficial in increasing the survival of patients who are deemed inoperable after 3-4 cycles of chemotherapy.

Expanding the Use of HIPEC in Ovarian Cancer at Time of Interval Debulking Surgery to FIGO Stage IV and After 6 Cycles of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: A Prospective Analysis on Perioperative and Oncologic Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Randomized data on patients with FIGO stage III ovarian cancer receiving ≤ 3 cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) showed that hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) after interval debulking surgery (IDS) improved patient's survival. We assessed the perioperative outcomes and PFS of FIGO stage IV and/or patients receiving up to 6 cycles of NACT undergoing IDS+HIPEC.

METHODS

Prospectively collected cases from January 1, 2019 to July 31, 2022 were included. Patients underwent HIPEC if: age ≥ 18 years but < 75 years, body mass index ≤ 35 kg/m2, ASA score ≤ 2, FIGO stage III/IV epithelial disease treated with up to 6 cycles of NACT, and residual disease < 2.5 mm.

RESULTS

A total of 205 patients were included. No difference was found in baseline characteristics between FIGO Stage III and IV patients, whereas rate of stable disease after NACT (p = 0.004), mean surgical complexity score at IDS (p = 0.001), and bowel resection rate (p = 0.046) were higher in patients undergoing delayed IDS. A lower rate of patients with at least one G3-G5 postoperative complications was observed in FIGO stage IV versus FIGO stage III disease (5.3% vs. 14.0%; p = 0.052). This difference was confirmed at multivariable analysis (odds ratio [OR] 0.24; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.07-0.80; p = 0.02), whereas age, SCS, bowel resection, and number of cycles did not affect postoperative complications. No difference in PFS was identified neither between FIGO stage III and IV patients (p = 0.44), nor between 3 and 4 versus > 4 cycles of NACT (p = 0.85).

CONCLUSIONS

Because of the absence of additional complications and positive survival outcomes, HIPEC administration can be considered in selected FIGO stage IV and patients receiving > 4 cycles of NACT.

Role of Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy Combined with Cytoreductive Surgery as Consolidation Therapy for Advanced Epithelial Ovarian Cancer

BACKGROUND

Patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer who undergo incomplete surgery followed by six cycles of chemotherapy could benefit from second-look or consolidation cytoreductive surgery (CCRS). The primary goal of this study was to evaluate the overall survival (OS) in patients undergoing complete CCRS and the factors affecting survival. The secondary goal was to study the benefit of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in these patients.

METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis of 173 patients with CCRS with (n = 118) or without (n = 55) HIPEC treated at 12 French centers. Only patients having a completeness of cytoreduction (CC) 0/1 resection and a minimum of 5 years of follow-up were included. HIPEC was performed systematically for all patients except those treated at the four centers that did not perform HIPEC.

RESULTS

The median Peritoneal Cancer Index was 6 (range 0-33). Closed HIPEC was performed in 59 (34.1%) patients and open HIPEC was performed in 56 (32.3%) patients. Grade 3-4 complications occurred in 64 (36.9%) patients. The median OS was 35.67 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 29.8-46.1) and was significantly longer for CCRS + HIPEC (31.4 months without HIPEC and 42.5 months with HIPEC; p = 0.022). On multivariate analysis, closed HIPEC (hazard ratio [HR] 0.46, 95% CI 0.29-0.73; p < 0.001) resulted in a longer OS, and age > 65 years (HR 2.17, 95% CI 1.14-4.11; p = 0.018) and bowel resection (HR 1.98, 95% CI 1.27-3.08; p = 0.020) led to a shorter OS. On multivariate logistic regression analysis, closed HIPEC (odds ratio 0.18; p = 0.001) was associated with a lower risk of dying at 5 years.

CONCLUSIONS

CCRS was performed with an acceptable morbidity and resulted in good overall survival. The role of HIPEC in addition to CCRS should be evaluated in prospective, randomized studies and the closed technique prospectively compared with the open technique.

Patient outcomes following interval and delayed cytoreductive surgery in advanced ovarian cancer: protocol for a multicenter, international, cohort study (Global Gynaecological Oncology Surgical Outcomes Collaborative)

BACKGROUND

The Global Gynecological Oncology Surgical Outcomes Collaborative (GO SOAR) has developed a network of gynecological oncology surgeons, surgical departments, and other interested parties that have the long-term ability to collaborate on outcome studies. Presented is the protocol for the GO SOAR2 study.

PRIMARY OBJECTIVES

To compare survival following interval and delayed cytoreductive surgery, between delayed cytoreductive surgery and no surgery (chemotherapy alone); and international variations in access to cytoreductive surgery for women with stage III-IV epithelial ovarian cancer.

STUDY HYPOTHESES

There is no difference in survival following interval and delayed cytoreductive surgery; there is poorer survival with no surgery compared with delayed cytoreductive surgery; and there are international disparities in prevalent practice and access to cytoreductive surgery in women with stage III-IV epithelial ovarian cancer.

TRIAL DESIGN

International, multicenter, mixed-methods cohort study. Participating centers, will review medical charts/electronic records of patients who had been consecutively diagnosed with stage III-IV ovarian cancer between January 1, 2006 and December 31, 2021. Qualitative interviews will be conducted to identify factors determining international variations in prevalent practice and access to cytoreductive surgery.

MAJOR INCLUSION/EXCLUSION CRITERIA

Inclusion criteria include women with stage III-IV epithelial ovarian cancer, undergoing interval (after 3-4 cycles of chemotherapy) or delayed (≥5 cycles of chemotherapy) cytoreductive surgeries or no cytoreductive surgery (≥5 cycles of chemotherapy alone).

PRIMARY ENDPOINTS

Overall survival (defined from date of diagnosis to date of death); progression-free survival (defined from date of diagnosis to date of first recurrence); facilitator/barriers to prevalent practice and access to cytoreductive surgery.

SAMPLE SIZE

In order to determine whether there is a difference in survival following interval and delayed cytoreductive surgery and no surgery, data will be abstracted from 1000 patients.

ESTIMATED DATES FOR COMPLETING ACCRUAL AND PRESENTING RESULTS

It is estimated that recruitment will be completed by 2023, and results published by 2024.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT05523804.

Primary or Interval Debulking Surgery in Advanced Ovarian Cancer: a Personalized Decision-a Literature Review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Summarize the writings published in the last 5 years on the management of surgery in the first line of treatment for advanced ovarian cancer.

RECENT FINDINGS

For patients with a significant tumor burden, the neoadjuvant chemotherapy therapy (NACT) with interval debulking surgery (IDS) strategy shows comparable efficacy than primary debulking surgery (PDS) in terms of survival in randomized studies with less morbidity. Advanced epithelial ovarian cancer generates more than half cases a recurrence. First-line treatment is based on a chemotherapy regimen combining a platinum-based and a taxane-based, associated with surgery. This review considers papers of last 5 years of timing, thinking tools, and innovation in the management. The choice of strategy, PDS or IDS, would be a personalized recommendation. The challenge is to adapt the timing of the surgery to the patient's characteristics and that of her disease.

Surgery in Advanced Ovary Cancer: Primary versus Interval Cytoreduction

Primary debulking surgery (PDS) has remained the only treatment of ovarian cancer with survival advantage since its development in the 1970s. However, survival advantage is only observed in patients who are optimally resected. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) has emerged as an alternative for patients in whom optimal resection is unlikely and/or patients with comorbidities at high risk for perioperative complications. The purpose of this review is to summarize the evidence to date for PDS and NACT in the treatment of stage III/IV ovarian carcinoma. We systematically searched the PubMed database for relevant articles. Prior to 2010, NACT was reserved for non-surgical candidates. After publication of EORTC 55971, the first randomized trial demonstrating non-inferiority of NACT followed by interval debulking surgery, NACT was considered in a wider breadth of patients. Since EORTC 55971, 3 randomized trials-CHORUS, JCOG0602, and SCORPION-have studied NACT versus PDS. While CHORUS supported EORTC 55971, JCOG0602 failed to demonstrate non-inferiority and SCORPION failed to demonstrate superiority of NACT. Despite conflicting data, a subset of patients would benefit from NACT while preserving survival including poor surgical candidates and inoperable disease. Further randomized trials are needed to assess the role of NACT.

MiR-149-3p promotes the cisplatin resistance and EMT in ovarian cancer through downregulating TIMP2 and CDKN1A

Background

Ovarian cancer (OC), a kind of gynecological cancer, is characterized by high mortality rate, with microRNAs (miRNAs) playing essential roles in it. However, the clinical significance of miRNAs and their molecular mechanisms in OC are mostly unknown.

Methods

miR-149-3p expression was predicted through Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) data in OC and confirmed by q-PCR in various OC cells and tissues from patients with different clinical characteristics. Moreover, its roles in terms of proliferation, migration and invasion were measured by CCK-8, colony formation, wound healing and transwell assays in OC cells including cisplatin-resistant and cisplatin-sensitive cells. And its effect on epithelial-mesenchymal transition was also assessed through detecting related protein expression. Additionally, its potential targets were verified by dual luciferase assay and Ago-RIP assay. Finally, its oncogenic functions were explored in vivo.

Results

In data from GSE79943, GSE131790, and TCGA, miR-149-3p was found to be highly expressed in OC tissues and associated with poor survival. In metastasis and chemoresistant tissues and cisplatin-resistant OC cells, its high expression was confirmed. In terms of tumorigenic effects, miR-149-3p knockdown in cisplatin-resistant OC cells inhibited its cisplatin resistance and other malignant phenotypes, while miR-149-3p overexpression in cisplatin-resistant OC cells led to contrary results. Mechanistically, miR-149-3p targeted 3’UTR of CDKN1A and TIMP2 to function as an oncogenic miRNA.

Conclusion

In brief, miR-149-3p promoted cisplatin resistance and EMT in OC by downregulating CDKN1A and TIMP2, which might provide a potential therapeutic target for OC treatment.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13048-021-00919-5.

Survival impact of bowel resection at the time of interval cytoreductive surgery for advanced ovarian cancer

Objectives

To evaluate the impact of bowel resection at the time of interval cytoreductive surgery on survival.

Methods

We identified patients with advanced ovarian cancer who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy and interval cytoreductive surgery between 2008 and 2018 from a single-institution tumor registry. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and Cox proportional hazards models were performed comparing patients who underwent bowel resection to those who did not.

Results

Of 158 patients, 43 (27%) underwent bowel resection. Rates of optimal (95%) and sub-optimal (5%) resection did not differ with bowel resection. Patients that required bowel resection had worse three-year survival (43% vs. 63%), even after adjusting for confounding variables of age, stage, number of neoadjuvant cycles, R0 resection, and ASA score (HR 2.27, p < 0.01). Adjusted progression-free survival did not differ between groups (HR 0.92, p = 0.72). Patients who underwent bowel resection were more likely to require blood transfusion (p < 0.01), and have a longer hospital stay (5 days vs 7.5 days, p < 0.01).

Conclusions

Bowel resection at the time of interval cytoreduction confers a greater than 2-fold increased risk of mortality and does not impact progression-free survival. Long-term sequelae of the peri-operative morbidity of bowel resection may contribute to increased mortality, and bowel resection may be a surrogate for disease biology with poor prognosis.

Optimizing the number of cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in advanced epithelial ovarian carcinoma: A propensity-score matching analysis

OBJECTIVE

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy and interval debulking surgery are now widely offered in ovarian cancer patients unsuitable for surgery; the number of preoperative NACT cycles to be given is still an issue. Our aim was to compare survival outcomes of patients with advanced ovarian cancer treated with ≤4 or more NACT cycles.

METHODS

A cohort of AEOC patients with stage III-IV epithelial OC who underwent NACT followed by IDS was identified. Patients were classified in group A (≤4 cycles) and group B (>4 cycles). Selection bias from the heterogeneity of demographic and clinical characteristics was avoided using propensity score matching (2:1 ratio).

RESULTS

140 (group A) and 70 (group B) patients were included. After the propensity score matching, there were no imbalances in baseline characteristics. BRCA status was associated to improved OS (HR = 0.41; 95%CI 0.18.0.92, p = 0.032) and residual tumor to decreased OS (HR = 1.93; 95%CI 1.08-3.46, p = 0.026). Statistically significant differences were not observed in OS (2-year OS 82.4% for group A versus 77.1% for group B, p = 0.109) and PFS (2-year PFS 29.7% for group A versus 20.0% for group A, p = 0.875). In group B, the administration of >4 cycles was related to an additional chance of achieving complete (12.9%) and partial (34.3%) responses compared to responses after 3-4 cycles.

CONCLUSIONS

Receiving more than 4 cycles of NACT is no detrimental in terms of OS and PFS in advanced ovarian cancer. Response rates can increase following further cycles administration.

APPROACH

Timing of surgery in patients with partial response or stable disease after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for advanced ovarian cancer

OBJECTIVE

The ideal number of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) cycles prior to interval tumor-reductive surgery (iTRS) for advanced ovarian cancer is poorly defined. We sought to assess survival stratified by number of NACT cycles and residual disease following iTRS in patients with advanced ovarian cancer with partial response (PR) or stable disease (SD) following 3-4 cycles of NACT.

METHODS

We retrospectively identified patients with advanced high-grade ovarian cancer (diagnosed 2/1/2013 to 2/1/2018) who received at least 3 cycles of NACT and iTRS and had a PR or SD. The population was divided into four groups based on the number of NACT cycles prior to iTRS and residual disease status after (CGR [complete gross residual] or incomplete resection [any amount of residual disease]): 1) 3-4 NACT cycles/CGR, 2) 3-4 NACT cycles/incomplete resection, 3) > 4 cycles/CGR, and 4) >4 cycles/incomplete resection. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were estimated using a Kaplan-Meier product-limit estimator and modeled using univariable and multivariable Cox proportional hazards analysis.

RESULTS

The cohort consisted of 265 patients with advanced high-grade ovarian cancer with a median age at diagnosis of 65 years. Most were White (87%), had serous histology (89%), and stage IV disease (57%), with an overall CGR rate of 81%. In a multivariable analysis receipt of >4 NACT cycles was not associated with worse PFS or OS (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.02, 95% CI 0.74-1.42; aHR 1.12, 95% CI, 0.73-1.72 respectively) than was receipt of 3-4 cycles. Any amount of residual disease was associated with worse PFS and OS regardless of the number of NACT cycles (aHR 1.56, 95% CI 1.09-2.22; aHR 2.38, 95% CI 1.52-3.72 respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Residual disease was associated with worse survival outcomes regardless of the number of NACT cycles in patients with PR or SD after NACT for advanced high-grade ovarian cancer. These data suggest that the ability to achieve CGR should take precedence in decision-making regarding the timing of surgery.