Timing is everything: intraperitoneal chemotherapy after primary or interval debulking surgery for 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.

Feasibility of neoadjuvant and adjuvant intraperitoneal chemotherapy in patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer: A single-center experience

Intraperitoneal (IP) chemotherapy is believed to prolong the survival of patients with advanced ovarian cancer after primary debulking surgery. However, there is little knowledge about IP chemotherapy in the setting of neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and there are contradictory conclusions about adjuvant IP chemotherapy. Here, we evaluated the feasibility of neoadjuvant and adjuvant IP chemotherapy in patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (AEOC).We retrospectively reviewed the data of 114 patients with AEOC who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by laparoscopic conservative interval debulking surgery (NACT + LIDS) in our institution from January 1, 2009 to December 31, 2017.The median overall survival (OS) was 56 months and the median disease-free interval (DFI) was 14 months for the entire study population. Neoadjuvant IP chemotherapy cycles were crucial for the treatment of no gross residual (R0) disease (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.446, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.245-0.811), which was independently associated with OS of the entire study population (HR = 9.589, 95% CI = 3.911-23.507). In addition, residual disease and body mass index (BMI) were the prognostic factors for DFI (HR = 6.022, 95% CI = 3.632-9.986; HR = 1.085, 95% CI = 1.012-1.163). However, adjuvant IP cycles along with BMI were the determining factors for DFI in the R0 group (HR = 0.703, 95% CI = 0.525-0.941; HR = 1.130, 95% CI = 1.025-1.247), and were associated with OS in the R0 group (HR = 0.488, 95% CI = 0.289-0.824). The OS and DFI Kaplan-Meier curves stratified by adjuvant IP chemothearpy cycles within the R0 group were statistically significant (P = .024 and P = .033, respectively).Our results showed improvement in patients with AEOC in terms of survival, thus suggesting the feasibility of neoadjuvant and adjuvant IP chemotherapy.

Splenectomy during cytoreductive surgery in epithelial ovarian cancer

Background

The aim of the study was to analyze the underlying causes and application of splenectomy in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) and assess its effect on the surgical satisfaction and prognosis of these patients.

Materials and methods

Clinical data of patients with ovarian epithelial cancer treated with cytoreductive surgery were collected from 2000 to 2015 at Peking Union Medical College Hospital.

Results

A total of 2,882 patients underwent ovarian cancer cytoreductive surgery at Peking Union Medical College Hospital between 2000 and 2015, of whom 38 (1.3%) also underwent spleen resections. Of these 38 patients, one underwent splenectomy due to intraoperative trauma, whereas the remaining 37 patients underwent splenectomy due to splenic metastasis. Among these 37 patients, 27 underwent resection due to direct tumor spread in the spleen and 10 underwent resection due to hematogenous metastasis. For subsequent first-line chemotherapy, 22 patients were platinum sensitive and 15 were platinum resistant. Overall median survival and the postsplenectomy median survival time were 106 and 75 months, respectively. The overall median survival in secondary cytoreduction was 101 months compared with 20.3–56 months in literature reviews. Univariate analysis revealed that platinum resistance to first-line chemotherapy, suboptimal surgery, and hematogenous metastasis influenced survival. Chemosensitivity and residual disease were identified as independent risk factors by multivariate analysis. We also report a literature review concerning the efficacy and safety of splenectomy during cytoreductive surgery in EOC.

Conclusion

Approximately 1.3% of patients with EOC underwent spleen resection during initial cytoreductive surgery and more often during recytoreductive surgery. Tumor involvement was the most common indication for splenectomy, and rare patients underwent splenectomy due to intraoperative trauma. Most patients achieved optimal surgery, and thus their overall survival and postsplenectomy survival rates were longer. The prognosis of patients was closely related to chemosensitivity and presence of residual tumors. Splenectomy should be attempted in all patients with splenic involvement in whom optimal cytoreductive surgery was achievable, no matter in primary or secondary cytoreduction.