Fertility-Sparing surgery for young women with ovarian endometrioid carcinoma: a multicenteric comparative study using inverse probability of treatment weighting

Fertility-Sparing Surgery for Stage I Epithelial Ovarian Cancer

OBJECTIVE

To describe population-level utilization of fertility-sparing surgery and outcome of reproductive-aged patients with early epithelial ovarian cancer who underwent fertility-sparing surgery in the United States.

METHODS

This retrospective study queried the National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Result Program. The study included 3,027 patients younger than age 50 years with stage I epithelial ovarian cancer receiving primary surgical therapy from 2007 to 2020. Fertility-sparing surgery was defined as preservation of one ovary and the uterus for unilateral lesion and preservation of the uterus for bilateral lesions. Temporal trend of fertility-sparing surgery was assessed with linear segmented regression with log-transformation. Overall survival associated with fertility-sparing surgery was assessed with Cox proportional hazard regression model.

RESULTS

A total of 534 patients (17.6%) underwent fertility-sparing surgery. At the cohort level, the utilization of fertility-sparing surgery was 13.4% in 2007 and 21.8% in 2020 ( P for trend=.009). Non-Hispanic White individuals (2.8-fold), those with high-grade serous histology (2.2-fold), and individuals with stage IC disease (2.3-fold) had a more than twofold increase in fertility-sparing surgery utilization during the study period (all P for trend<.05). After controlling for the measured clinicopathologic characteristics, patients who received fertility-sparing surgery had overall survival comparable with that of patients who had nonsparing surgery (5-year rates 93.6% vs 92.1%, adjusted hazard ratio 0.87, 95% CI, 0.57-1.35). This survival association was consistent in high-grade serous (5-year rates 92.9% vs 92.4%), low-grade serous (100% vs 92.2%), clear cell (97.5% vs 86.1%), mucinous (92.1% vs 86.6%), low-grade endometrioid (95.7% vs 97.7%), and mixed (93.3% vs 83.7%) histology (all P >.05). In high-grade endometrioid tumor, fertility-sparing surgery was associated with decreased overall survival (5-year rates 71.9% vs 93.8%, adjusted hazard ratio 2.90, 95% CI, 1.09-7.67). Among bilateral ovarian lesions, fertility-sparing surgery was not associated with overall survival (5-year rates 95.8% vs 92.5%, P =.364). Among 41,914 patients who had epithelial ovarian cancer with any age and stage, those younger than age 50 years with stage I disease increased from 8.6% to 10.9% during the study period ( P for trend=.002).

CONCLUSION

Nearly one in five reproductive-aged patients with stage I epithelial ovarian cancer underwent fertility-sparing surgery in recent years in the United States. More than 90% of reproductive-aged patients with stage I epithelial ovarian cancer who underwent fertility-sparing surgery were alive at the 5-year timepoint, except for those with high-grade endometrioid tumors.

Women With Ovarian Cancer and With Fertility Preservation: A Survival Analysis Using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Database and Construction of Nomograms to Predict Cancer-Specific Survival

Objective

This study aimed to determine the risk and prognostic factors of ovarian cancer (OC) in women having fertility-sparing surgery, as well as survival outcomes of those with stage I epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). We also determined the effect of chemotherapy in OC treatment and used multiple independent risk factors to establish a prognostic nomogram model for patients with stage I EOC.

Patients and Methods

Individuals with OC and with fertility-sparing surgery (FSS) between 1998 and 2016 were identified in the SEER database. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression was performed to identify the distributions of patient characteristics according to chemotherapy. Cancer-specific survival (CSS) was assessed using Kaplan–Meier curves and log-rank tests. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression was conducted to determine the independent prognostic factors for CSS. Cox analysis was used to construct a nomogram model. The C-index and calibration plots showed the performance evaluation results.

Results

A total of 1,839 women with OC with FSS were identified in the SEER database. Factors associated with significantly higher odds of undergoing chemotherapy included younger age, being unmarried, having grades 2–4, stages II–III, or clear cell and non-epithelial histologic type following a multivariate logistic regression analysis. Multivariate Cox regression analysis confirmed that age, marital status, chemotherapy, histologic type, grade, and the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage were independent prognostic factors for CSS. In stage I EOC, the prognosis in patients with stage IA/IB-grade 3 (5-year CSS 85.3%) or stage IC (5-year CSS 80.6%) was worse than that in those with stage IA/IB-grade 1 (5-year CSS 95.2%), or stage IA/IB-grade 2 (5-year CSS 94.7%). However, chemotherapy improved the survival of patients with stage IA/IB-grade 3 (5-year CSS 78.1% vs. 94.6%, p = 0.024) or stage IC (5-year CSS 75.1% vs. 86.7%, p = 0.170).

Discussion

The study provided population-based estimates of risk factors and prognoses in patients with OC and with FSS as well as the survival outcomes of patients with stage I EOC and the effect of chemotherapy. The constructed nomograms exhibited superior prognostic discrimination and survival prediction for patients with stage I EOC.

Is adjuvant chemotherapy necessary for young women with early-stage epithelial ovarian cancer who have undergone fertility-sparing surgery?: a multicenter retrospective analysis

OBJECTIVE

In young patients with early-stage epithelial ovarian carcinoma (EOC) who were received fertility-sparing surgery (FSS), the role of adjuvant chemotherapy is unclear. Here, we performed a multicenter study using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) to explore the effect of chemotherapy on patients' survival.

METHODS

Between 1987 and 2015, a retrospective study was carried out, including 1183 patients with stage I EOC. Among them, a total of 101 women with stage I EOC who underwent FSS were investigated, including 64 and 37 patients with or without adjuvant chemotherapy, respectively. Oncologic outcomes were compared between the two arms using original and IPTW cohorts.

RESULTS

During 62.6 months (median) of follow-up, recurrence was noted in 11 (17.2%) women in the chemotherapy arm and 6 (16.2%) patients in the observation arm. In the unweighted cohort, the 5-year overall and recurrence-free survival (OS/RFS) rates of chemotherapy and observation arms were 86.3/80.8 and 90.2/79.8%, respectively. There was no significant difference between the two groups {Log-rank: P = 0.649 (OS)/P = 0.894 (RFS)}. In the IPTW cohort after adjusting for various clinicopathologic covariates, we also failed to identify a difference in RFS/OS between the two groups {RFS (chemotherapy vs. observation), HR: 0.501 (95% CI 0.234-1.072), P = 0.075: OS (chemotherapy vs. observation), HR: 0.939 (95% CI 0.330-2.669), P = 0.905}.

CONCLUSIONS

Even after adjusting clinicopathologic covariates, performing adjuvant chemotherapy may not improve the oncologic outcome in young patients who have undergone FSS.

Survival benefits of retroperitoneal lymphadenectomy for optimally-resected advanced ovarian high-grade serous carcinoma: a multi-institutional retrospective study

Objective

The survival benefits of retroperitoneal lymphadenectomy (RLNA) for epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) remain controversial because clinical behaviors differ among subtypes. The purpose of the present study was to clarify whether RLNA increases the survival rate of advanced high-grade serous carcinoma (HGSC).

Methods

This was a retrospective cohort analysis of 3,227 patients with EOC treated between 1986 and 2017 at 14 institutions. Among them, 335 patients with stage IIB-IV HGSC who underwent optimal cytoreduction (residual tumor of <1 cm) were included. Patients were divided into the RLNA group (n=170) and non-RLNA group (n=165). All pathological slides were assessed based on a central pathological review. Oncologic outcomes were compared between the two groups in the original and weighted cohorts adjusted with the inverse probability of treatment weighting.

Results

The median observation period was 49.8 (0.5–241.5) months. Overall, 219 (65%) out of 335 patients had recurrence or progression, while 146 (44%) died of the disease. In the original cohort, RLNA was a significant prognostic factor for longer progression-free survival (PFS) (hazard ratio [HR]=0.741; 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.558–0.985) and overall survival (OS) (HR=0.652; 95% CI=0.459–0.927). In the weighted cohort in which all variables were well balanced as standardized differences decreased, RLNA was also a significant prognostic factor for more favorable oncologic outcomes (PFS, adjusted HR=0.742; 95% CI=0.613–0.899) and OS, adjusted HR=0.620; 95% CI=0.488–0.787).

Conclusion

The present study demonstrated that RLNA for stage III-IV HGSC with no residual tumor after primary debulking surgery contributed to better oncologic outcomes.

Retroperitoneal lymphadenectomy for advanced-stage patients with ovarian high-grade serous carcinoma can improve oncologic outcomes. This multi-centered retrospective study was performed under the same chemotherapeutic protocol and criteria. Inverse probability of treatment weighting method was used to make weighted cohorts.

Ovarian Cancer, Version 2.2020, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology

Epithelial ovarian cancer is the leading cause of death from gynecologic cancer in the United States and is the country's fifth most common cause of cancer mortality in women. A major challenge in treating ovarian cancer is that most patients have advanced disease at initial diagnosis. These NCCN Guidelines discuss cancers originating in the ovary, fallopian tube, or peritoneum, as these are all managed in a similar manner. Most of the recommendations are based on data from patients with the most common subtypes─high-grade serous and grade 2/3 endometrioid. The NCCN Guidelines also include recommendations specifically for patients with less common ovarian cancers, which in the guidelines include the following: carcinosarcoma, clear cell carcinoma, mucinous carcinoma, low-grade serous, grade 1 endometrioid, borderline epithelial, malignant sex cord-stromal, and malignant germ cell tumors. This manuscript focuses on certain aspects of primary treatment, including primary surgery, adjuvant therapy, and maintenance therapy options (including PARP inhibitors) after completion of first-line chemotherapy.

Fertility-sparing surgery and oncologic outcome among patients with early-stage ovarian cancer ~propensity score- matched analysis~

Background

The aim of this study was to investigate how much the risks of recurrence and death are increased as a consequence of selecting fertility-sparing surgery (FSS) in young women with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC).

Methods

After a central pathological review and search of the medical records from 14 collaborating hospitals, a non-randomized, observational cohort study was conducted between 1987 and 2015, including 1183 women with stage I EOC. Finally, a total of 285 patients with stage I EOC at reproductive age were recruited. Oncologic outcomes were compared between the FSS (N = 101) and radical surgery (RS) group (N = 184) using a propensity score (PS)-matching technique to adjust for relevant risk factors: the age, substage, histological type, grade, CA125 values, ascites cytology, ascites volume, and chemotherapy.

Results

During 66.0 months (median) of follow-up, 42 patients (14.7%) developed recurrence, and 31 patients (10.9%) died. In the original cohort, there was no significant difference in overall survival (OS) or recurrence-free survival (RFS) between the FSS and RS groups {Log-rank: OS (P = 0.838), RFS (P = 0.377)}. In the PS-matched cohort after adjustment for multiple clinicopathologic factors, there was no significant difference in RFS or OS between the FSS and RS groups {RFS (FSS vs. RS), HR: 1.262 (95% CI: 0.559–2.852), P = 0. 575; OS (FSS vs. RS), HR: 1.206 (95% CI: 0.460–3.163), P = 0.704}.

Conclusions

After adjustment for clinicopathologic factors, FSS in itself may not worsen the oncologic outcome in young women with early-stage EOC. A large-scale clinical study is necessary to validate the findings.