Comparisons of Clinical Outcomes in Women with Advanced Ovarian Cancer Treated with Frontline Intraperitoneal versus Dose-Dense Platinum/Paclitaxel Chemotherapy without Bevacizumab

Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy without Bevacizumab versus Intravenous Chemotherapy with Bevacizumab as the Frontline Adjuvant Therapy in Advanced Ovarian Cancer

Objectives: To compare the clinical outcomes of intravenous carboplatin/paclitaxel chemotherapy plus bevacizumab versus intraperitoneal cisplatin/paclitaxel chemotherapy without bevacizumab as the frontline treatment in women with advanced ovarian, fallopian tube and primary peritoneal cancer. Methods: Between November 2012 and January 2024, medical records of all consecutive women with stage II~IV cancer treated with either frontline adjuvant intraperitoneal cisplatin/paclitaxel without bevacizumab (IP group), intravenous carboplatin/paclitaxel without bevacizumab (IV group) or intravenous carboplatin/paclitaxel with bevacizumab (IVB group) at a tertiary referral center were reviewed. Results: A total of 143 women (IP group, n = 57; IVB group, n = 23; IV group, n = 63) were reviewed. The IP group had greater progression-free survival compared to the IVB group (49.1 months, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 27.8 months to infinity, versus 11.9 months, 95% CI = 11.2 to 16.2 months; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] = 0.45, 95% CI = 0.24 to 0.87, p = 0.017). Additionally, the IP group also had a higher overall survival compared to the IVB group (not reached, 95% CI = 55.6 months to infinity, versus 38.9 months, 95% CI = 21.9 months to infinity; adjusted HR = 0.34, 95% CI = 0.15 to 0.79, p = 0.012). Conclusions: Intraperitoneal cisplatin/paclitaxel chemotherapy without bevacizumab seems to offer a survival advantage when compared with intravenous carboplatin/paclitaxel with bevacizumab in the frontline treatment of women with advanced ovarian cancer.

Comparative Survival Outcomes of Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy, Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy and Intravenous Chemotherapy for Primary Advanced Ovarian Cancer: A Network Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to compare the survival outcomes and adverse events of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), intraperitoneal chemotherapy (IP)and intravenous chemotherapy (IP)for primary advanced ovarian cancer.

METHODS

PubMed, CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials), Embase, Web of Science and Scopus were searched using multiple terms for primary advanced ovarian cancer, including randomized controlled trials and comparative studies in both Chinese and English (up to date 15 August 2022). Outcomes include overall survival, progression-free survival and adverse events. The data were pooled and reported as hazard ratio (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scales were used to assess the risk of bias in the included comparative study. The Cochrane Collaboration's Risk of Bias Tool was used for randomized controlled trials.

RESULTS

In total, 32 studies, including 6347 patients and 8 different platinum-based chemotherapy regimens, were included in this network meta-analysis. Our analysis results showed that HIPEC2 (carboplatin with area under the curve 10) exhibited a statistically significant OS benefit compared to IV, weekly dose-dense chemotherapy and HIPEC1 (cisplatin with 75/100 mg/m²). Intraperitoneal plus intravenous chemotherapy was associated with a statistically significantly better likelihood of overall survival compared to IV. For progression-free survival, our statistical results only suggest a better progression-free survival in ovarian cancer patients treated with HIPEC1 compared with weekly dose-dense chemotherapy. No evidence of difference was observed between the other comparison groups. Compared with the non-HIPEC group, HIPEC may had a higher incidence of electrolyte disturbances (≥grade 3).

CONCLUSION

Our statistical analysis suggests that the groups receiving HIPEC2 had a better OS than the groups receiving IV, weekly dose-dense chemotherapy and HIPEC1. For PFS, our analysis only showed HIPEC1 is better than IV. Moreover, HIPEC may lead to a higher incidence of electrolyte disturbances (≥grade 3). HIPEC therapy for advanced ovarian cancer is currently controversial.