Phase II evaluation of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and debulking followed by intraperitoneal chemotherapy in women with stage III and IV epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube or primary peritoneal cancer: Southwest Oncology Group Study S0009

NCCN Guidelines Insights: Ovarian Cancer, Version 1.2019

Epithelial ovarian cancer is the leading cause of death from gynecologic cancer in the United States, with less than half of patients living >5 years from diagnosis. A major challenge in treating ovarian cancer is that most patients have advanced disease at initial diagnosis. The best outcomes are observed in patients whose primary treatment includes complete resection of all visible disease plus combination platinum-based chemotherapy. Research efforts are focused on primary neoadjuvant treatments that may improve resectability, as well as systemic therapies providing improved long-term survival. These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on recent updates to neoadjuvant chemotherapy recommendations, including the addition of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy, and the role of PARP inhibitors and bevacizumab as maintenance therapy options in select patients who have completed primary chemotherapy.

Intraperitoneal chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemotherapy and optimal interval tumor reductive surgery for advanced ovarian cancer

OBJECTIVES

Intraperitoneal (IP) chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) and interval tumor reductive surgery (TRS) for advanced ovarian cancer is feasible, however, the impact on disease outcomes remains unclear. We compare outcomes of patients treated with IP chemotherapy versus intravenous (IV) chemotherapy following NACT and interval TRS.

METHODS

In this retrospective review, patients with advanced ovarian cancer were included if they received NACT followed by optimal interval TRS between 1/2004 and 4/2017. Patients were excluded if they had an ECOG PS >1, received >6 cycles of NACT or postoperative chemotherapy, and/or received bevacizumab during primary therapy. Primary outcomes were progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

There were 134 patients included in this study, 37 (28%) received IP and 97 (72%) received IV chemotherapy postoperatively. Patients in the IV group were older (median 66.3 vs 59.7 years, p = 0.0039) though there were no differences in BMI, race, BRCA status, stage, or histology. Median PFS was 3 months longer in the IP group (14.5 versus 11.5 months, p = 0.028) however there was no significant difference in OS. On univariate analysis, increasing number of NACT cycles (HR 1.914, 95% CI 1.024-3.497) and residual disease at completion of TRS (HR 1.541, 95% CI 1.042-2.248) were associated with decreased PFS; IP chemotherapy was associated with increased PFS (HR 0.633, 95% CI 0.414-0.944). These associations remained on multivariate analysis. Toxicity was comparable between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

IP after NACT and optimal interval TRS was associated with in improved PFS compared to IV chemotherapy without significant differences in toxicity.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for newly diagnosed, advanced ovarian cancer: Society of Gynecologic Oncology and American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline

PURPOSE

To provide guidance to clinicians regarding the use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and interval cytoreduction among women with stage IIIC or IV epithelial ovarian cancer.

METHODS

The Society of Gynecologic Oncology and the American Society of Clinical Oncology convened an Expert Panel and conducted a systematic review of the literature.

RESULTS

Four phase III clinical trials form the primary evidence base for the recommendations. The published studies suggest that for selected women with stage IIIC or IV epithelial ovarian cancer, neoadjuvant chemotherapy and interval cytoreduction are non-inferior to primary cytoreduction and adjuvant chemotherapy with respect to overall and progression-free survival and are associated with less perioperative morbidity and mortality.

RECOMMENDATIONS

All women with suspected stage IIIC or IV invasive epithelial ovarian cancer should be evaluated by a gynecologic oncologist prior to initiation of therapy. The primary clinical evaluation should include a CT of the abdomen and pelvis, and chest imaging (CT preferred). Women with a high perioperative risk profile or a low likelihood of achieving cytoreduction to <1cm of residual disease (ideally to no visible disease) should receive neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Women who are fit for primary cytoreductive surgery, and with potentially resectable disease, may receive either neoadjuvant chemotherapy or primary cytoreductive surgery. However, primary cytoreductive surgery is preferred if there is a high likelihood of achieving cytoreduction to <1cm (ideally to no visible disease) with acceptable morbidity. Before neoadjuvant chemotherapy is delivered, all patients should have confirmation of an invasive ovarian, fallopian tube, or peritoneal cancer. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/NACT-ovarian-guideline and www.asco.org/guidelineswiki.

Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Newly Diagnosed, Advanced Ovarian Cancer: Society of Gynecologic Oncology and American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline

PURPOSE

To provide guidance to clinicians regarding the use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and interval cytoreduction among women with stage IIIC or IV epithelial ovarian cancer.

METHODS

The Society of Gynecologic Oncology and the American Society of Clinical Oncology convened an Expert Panel and conducted a systematic review of the literature.

RESULTS

Four phase III clinical trials form the primary evidence base for the recommendations. The published studies suggest that for selected women with stage IIIC or IV epithelial ovarian cancer, neoadjuvant chemotherapy and interval cytoreduction are noninferior to primary cytoreduction and adjuvant chemotherapy with respect to overall and progression-free survival and are associated with less perioperative morbidity and mortality.

RECOMMENDATIONS

All women with suspected stage IIIC or IV invasive epithelial ovarian cancer should be evaluated by a gynecologic oncologist prior to initiation of therapy. The primary clinical evaluation should include a CT of the abdomen and pelvis, and chest imaging (CT preferred). Women with a high perioperative risk profile or a low likelihood of achieving cytoreduction to < 1 cm of residual disease (ideally to no visible disease) should receive neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Women who are fit for primary cytoreductive surgery, and with potentially resectable disease, may receive either neoadjuvant chemotherapy or primary cytoreductive surgery. However, primary cytoreductive surgery is preferred if there is a high likelihood of achieving cytoreduction to < 1 cm (ideally to no visible disease) with acceptable morbidity. Before neoadjuvant chemotherapy is delivered, all patients should have confirmation of an invasive ovarian, fallopian tube, or peritoneal cancer. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/NACT-ovarian-guideline and www.asco.org/guidelineswiki.

Intraperitoneal chemotherapy after interval debulking surgery for advanced-stage ovarian cancer: Feasibility and outcomes at a comprehensive cancer center

OBJECTIVES

Intraperitoneal (IP)-based chemotherapy following primary debulking surgery (PDS), although associated with substantial toxicity, is supported by a strong evidence base. We sought to determine feasibility and outcomes of IP chemotherapy after interval debulking surgery (IDS) among patients deemed ineligible for PDS.

METHODS

We identified all patients with high-grade, stage III/IV ovarian cancer treated at our institution with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) followed by IDS and postoperative chemotherapy from 1/2008-5/2013. IP and intravenous (IV) regimens were defined; demographic and clinical data were analyzed using appropriate statistics.

RESULTS

Of 128 evaluable patients, 118 (92%) achieved ≤1cm residual disease at IDS and 74 (58%) achieved a complete gross resection (CGR). An IP port was placed in 54/128 patients (42%), with 89% port utilization. Forty-eight (38%) of 128 patients received IP chemotherapy, 17 (13%) weekly IV paclitaxel/q3week carboplatin, and 63 (49%) q3week IV carboplatin/paclitaxel. Patients completed a median of 3 IP cycles (range, 2-6), with 3 (5.5%) of 54 ports removed due to complications. Overall survival (OS) for patients with a CGR treated with IP and weekly IV chemotherapy was 53.2months (range, 24.7-NE), and 44.2months (range, 30.2-NE) with any visible residual disease (p<0.001). Median OS was 53.2months (range, 44.5-NE) for IP-, not reached for weekly IV-, and 34.2months (range, 27.5-49.8) for q3week IV-treated patients (p=0.1).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients administered IP after IDS had a high rate of successful port utilization, with few regimen switches. Oncologic outcomes were optimal in patients with a CGR at IDS, regardless of chemotherapy used.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy and primary debulking surgery utilization for advanced-stage ovarian cancer at a comprehensive cancer center

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) and primary debulking surgery (PDS) before and after results from a randomized trial were published and showed non-inferiority between NACT and PDS in the management of advanced-stage ovarian carcinoma.

METHODS

We evaluated consecutive patients with advanced-stage ovarian cancer treated at our institution from 1/1/08-5/1/13, which encompassed 32 months before and 32 months after the randomized trial results were published. We included all newly diagnosed patients with high-grade histology and stage III/IV disease. Associations between the use of NACT and clinical variables over time were evaluated.

RESULTS

Our study included 586 patients. Median age was 62 years (range, 30-90); 406 patients (69%) had stage III disease, and 570 (97%) had disease of serous histology. Twenty-six percent (154/586) were treated with NACT and 74% (432/586) with PDS. NACT use increased significantly from 22% (56/256) before 2010 (at which point the results of the randomized trial were published) to 30% (98/330) after 2010 (p=0.037). Although patients who underwent PDS were more likely to experience grade 3/4 surgical complications than those who underwent NACT, those selected for PDS had a median OS of 71.7 months (CI, 59.8-not reached) compared with 42.9 months (CI 37.1-56.3) for those selected for NACT.

CONCLUSIONS

In this single-institution analysis, the best survival outcomes were observed in patients who were deemed eligible for PDS followed by platinum-based chemotherapy. Selection criteria for NACT require further definition and should take institutional surgical strategy into account.

Interval debulking surgery for advanced epithelial ovarian cancer

BACKGROUND

Interval debulking surgery (IDS), following induction or neoadjuvant chemotherapy, may have a role in treating advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (stage III to IV) where primary debulking surgery is not an option.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and complications of IDS for women with advanced stage epithelial ovarian cancer.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Gynaecological Cancer Group's Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) 2012, Issue 6, MEDLINE and EMBASE for the original review in to June 2012. We updated the searches in June 2009, 2012 and 2015 for the review updates.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing survival of women with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer, who had IDS performed between cycles of chemotherapy after primary surgery with survival of women who had conventional treatment (primary debulking surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Searches for additional information from study authors were attempted. We performed meta-analysis of overall and progression-free survival (PFS), using random-effects models.

MAIN RESULTS

Three RCTs randomising 853 women, of whom 781 were evaluated, met the inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis of three trials for overall survival (OS) found no statistically significant difference between IDS and chemotherapy alone (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.80, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61 to 1.06, I² = 58%). Subgroup analysis for OS in two trials, where the primary surgery was not performed by gynaecologic oncologists or was less extensive, showed a benefit of IDS (HR = 0.68, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.87, I² = 0%). Meta-analysis of two trials for PFS found no statistically significant difference between IDS and chemotherapy alone (HR = 0.88, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.33, I² = 83%). Rates of toxic reactions to chemotherapy were similar in both arms (risk ratio = 1.19, 95% CI 0.53 to 2.66, I² = 0%), but little information was available for other adverse events or quality or life (QoL).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found no conclusive evidence to determine whether IDS between cycles of chemotherapy would improve or decrease the survival rates of women with advanced ovarian cancer, compared with conventional treatment of primary surgery followed by adjuvant chemotherapy. IDS appeared to yield benefit only in women whose primary surgery was not performed by gynaecologic oncologists or was less extensive. Data on QoL and adverse events were inconclusive.

Both heat and new chemotherapeutic drug dioxadet in hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemoperfusion improved survival in rat ovarian cancer model

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy (HIPEC) at the time of Cytoreductive Surgery (CRS) is an actively researched treatment in patients with advanced ovarian cancer. Relative contribution of heat and chemotherapeutic agents during HIPEC as well as efficacy of a new agent dioxadet for regional chemotherapy in a rat model of ovarian cancer was studied.

METHODS

Sixty rats were divided into three groups: no treatment control group (n = 19), hyperthermia without chemotherapy (HIPEP) (n = 14), HIPEC + cisplatin (n = 14), HIPEC + dioxadet (n = 13). The intra-abdominal tumor was not resected. End points were: median survival (primary), cause of death (secondary).

RESULTS

The median survival of the animals in the control group, HIPEP group, HIPEC + cisplatin, HIPEC + dioxadet were 9 (CI; 8-23), 22.5 (CI; 12-43), 25.5 (CI; 13-62), 49 (Cl; 28-70) days, respectively. The P-values control versus HIPEP, HIPEC + cisplatin versus HIPEC + dioxadet were 0.006, 0.002, and 0.001, respectively.

CONCLUSION

During HIPEC both the heat and the cytotoxic drug had antitumor effects in a rat ovarian cancer model. Dioxadet showed potential as a drug for regional chemotherapy. J. Surg. Oncol. 2016;113:438-442. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Cardiorespiratory fitness in survivors of cervical, endometrial, and ovarian cancers: The Cooper Center Longitudinal Study

BACKGROUND

Cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF), a strong predictor of mortality, is impaired among cancer patients. There is limited data, however, regarding CRF levels in women diagnosed with gynecologic cancers.

METHODS

We compared CRF among ovarian, endometrial, and cervical cancer cases (n=89) to age-matched controls (n=89) in the Cooper Center Longitudinal Study (CCLS). CRF was evaluated by a maximal treadmill exercise tolerance test using a modified-Balke protocol. Conditional logistic regression was used to test for case-control differences in cardiorespiratory fitness, after controlling for age and body mass index, and adhering to the matched pairs design.

RESULTS

The mean ages of cancer cases and controls were 50.9 years and 51.1 years, respectively (p=0.81). Peak METs (1 MET=3.5 mL kg(-1)min(-1)) were 9.2 ± 2.0 in cancer cases compared to 10.0 ± 2.2 in controls (p=0.03). When stratifying by type of cancer, peak METs were 8.9 ± 2.2, 8.4 ± 1.9, 9.5 ± 2.0 for patients with ovarian, endometrial, and cervical cancer, respectively. A gynecological cancer diagnosis was associated with greater odds of having 1-MET lower CRF compared to controls (OR 1.31, 95% CI: 1.05-1.64, p=0.018), after controlling for age and BMI.

CONCLUSION

Gynecologic cancer survivors were more likely to have a 1-MET lower CRF than controls. Given a 1-MET change in CRF is associated with a significant, we advocate for more robust research regarding CRF in gynecologic cancer patients.

Costs of treatment for elderly women with advanced ovarian cancer in a Medicare population

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the cost of treating women with advanced stage epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) undergoing primary debulking surgery (PDS) or neo-adjuvant chemotherapy (NACT).

METHODS

The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) - Medicare database (1992 to 2009) was used to evaluate the 7-month cost of care following PDS and NACT for advanced EOC. Multivariate analyses were used to evaluate differences between women treated by PDS and NACT on cost and survival.

RESULTS

Of the 4506 women eligible for analysis, 82.4% underwent PDS and 17.6% received NACT. Eighty-five percent with stage IIIC and 78.5% with stage IV EOC underwent PDS (p<0.0001). No significant difference in the median cost of care between PDS and NACT existed in women with stage IIIC EOC ($59,801 vs. $59,905). There was a 12% increase in adjusted cost of care for stage IV patients ($63,131 vs. $55,302) who received PDS (p<0.0001). Increasing Charlson score was associated with an increase in 7-month cost of care in both stages. NACT was associated with a decreased 5-year overall survival in women with stage IIIC EOC (HR=1.27, 95% CI: 1.10-1.47) and stage IV EOC (HR=1.19, 95% CI: 1.03-1.37) compared to PDS.

CONCLUSION

NACT and PDS are comparable in cost for women with stage IIIC EOC, and PDS is minimally more expensive for women with stage IV EOC. PDS was associated with an increase 5-year overall survival. Future investigations should include cost-effectiveness analyses where additional measures such as quality adjusted life years and propensity scored survival are included.

Does modality of adjuvant chemotherapy after interval surgical debulking matter in epithelial ovarian cancer?: An exploratory analysis

OBJECTIVES

This article aimed to study the role of adjuvant intraperitoneal (IP) chemotherapy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and optimal interval surgical debulking.

METHOD

All patients with epithelial ovarian cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy were retrospectively reviewed from 2007 to 2009. Demographics, related diseases, and survival outcome data were abstracted from the medical records. χ statistics were applied to categorical variables. Cox regression was used to model progression-free survival (PFS), adjusting for age, residual status, and use of adjuvant IP chemotherapy. All P values less than 0.05 were considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

Sixty-five patients were reviewed. The median age was 63.3 years. The majority had stage III disease with serous histology. Optimal residual (<1 cm) after interval debulking was achieved in 34 (54%) of 63 patients. Sixteen patients chose to receive adjuvant IP chemotherapy. The median follow-up was 26.2 months. Fifty-one patients had progressed, with a median PFS of 17.5 months. Adjuvant IP chemotherapy was not predictive of PFS (hazard ratio, 0.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.24-3.44; P = 0.89). The estimated median overall survival was 37.8 months (95% CI, 29.9-45.7) in the intravenous group versus 48.1 months (95% CI, 37.9-58.3) in the IP-treated patients (P = 0.162).

CONCLUSIONS

Adjuvant IP chemotherapy was not predictive of survival after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in our small exploratory study. The role of IP chemotherapy in this setting needs to be further studied in a larger prospective patient cohort.

Interval debulking surgery for advanced epithelial ovarian cancer

BACKGROUND

Interval debulking surgery (IDS), following induction or neoadjuvant chemotherapy, may have a role in treating advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (stage III to IV) where primary debulking surgery is not an option.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and complications of IDS for women with advanced stage epithelial ovarian cancer.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Gynaecological Cancer Group's Specialised Register to June 2012, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) 2012, Issue 6, MEDLINE to June 2012 and EMBASE to June 2012.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing survival of women with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer, who had IDS performed between cycles of chemotherapy after primary surgery with survival of women who had conventional treatment (primary debulking surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Searches for additional information from study authors were attempted. We performed meta-analysis of overall and progression-free survival (PFS), using random-effects models.

MAIN RESULTS

Three RCTs randomising 853 women, of whom 781 were evaluated, met the inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis of three trials for overall survival (OS) found no statistically significant difference between IDS and chemotherapy alone (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.80, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61 to 1.06, I² = 58%). Subgroup analysis for OS in two trials, where the primary surgery was not performed by gynaecologic oncologists or was less extensive, showed a benefit of IDS (HR = 0.68, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.87, I² = 0%). Meta-analysis of two trials for PFS found no statistically significant difference between IDS and chemotherapy alone (HR = 0.88, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.33, I² = 83%). Rates of toxic reactions to chemotherapy were similar in both arms (risk ratio = 1.19, 95% CI 0.53 to 2.66, I² = 0%), but little information was available for other adverse events or quality or life (QoL).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found no conclusive evidence to determine whether IDS between cycles of chemotherapy would improve or decrease the survival rates of women with advanced ovarian cancer, compared with conventional treatment of primary surgery followed by adjuvant chemotherapy. IDS appeared to yield benefit only in women whose primary surgery was not performed by gynaecologic oncologists or was less extensive. Data on QoL and adverse events were inconclusive.

Phase I trial of intraperitoneal pemetrexed, cisplatin, and paclitaxel in optimally debulked ovarian cancer

PURPOSE

This phase I trial evaluated intraperitoneal (i.p.) pemetrexed, cisplatin, and paclitaxel in optimally debulked ovarian cancer.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

Dose escalation of day 1 i.p. pemetrexed accrued three patients to each of five dose levels (60-1,000 mg/m(2)), along with day 2 i.p. cisplatin (75 mg/m(2)) and day 8 i.p. paclitaxel (60 mg/m(2)). The goals were to determine maximum tolerated dose (MTD), 18-month progression-free survival (PFS), and pharmacokinetics of i.p. pemetrexed.

RESULTS

Cycles, given every 21 days, had an 80% 6-cycle completion rate. There was minimal grade III toxicity in the first 4 dose levels and remarkably an almost complete absence of peripheral neuropathy and alopecia. At the highest dose level, two of three patients experienced ≥ grade III and dose-limiting toxicity (DLT; hematologic, infection, gastrointestinal). There was a pharmacokinetic advantage for i.p. pemetrexed with an intraperitoneal:plasma area under the concentration-time curve ratio of 13-fold. Neither analysis of pharmacokinetic nor homocysteine levels explains the unexpected severity of toxicity in those two patients. On the basis of plasma C(24h) levels, the 42 cycles at ≥ 500 mg/m(2) i.p. pemetrexed without DLT, the MTD appears to be 500 mg/m(2). Median PFS is 30.1 months; 18-month PFS is 78.6% (median follow-up 22.4 months).

CONCLUSIONS

This i.p.-only regimen in front-line ovarian cancer is feasible with PFS in line with recent literature. We suggest phase II trials of this regimen in this population with i.p. pemetrexed at 500 mg/m(2). The favorable toxicity profile at doses <1,000 mg/m(2), which needs to be confirmed, appears to compare well with standard combination i.v./i.p. platinum/taxane chemotherapy in this disease.

Practical considerations in ovarian cancer chemotherapy

Epithelial ovarian cancer remains the most lethal gynecologic malignancy despite advances in treatment. The standard management generally involves a combination of surgical tumor debulking and chemotherapy. Over the decades, chemotherapy for ovarian cancer has evolved and currently involves a combination of intravenous platinum and taxane chemotherapy. Over the past decade, three randomized phase III trials have been reported, and all have demonstrated a significant survival advantage for intraperitoneal compared with intravenous chemotherapy. However, there are potential barriers and controversies related to the administration of intraperitoneal chemotherapy in ovarian cancer patients. In this review, we discuss the evolution and current management considerations of chemotherapy for the treatment of epithelial ovarian cancer.

Factors affecting the completion of intraperitoneal chemotherapy in women with ovarian cancer

HYPOTHESIS

The use of intraperitoneal (IP) chemotherapy as treatment for ovarian cancer has been demonstrated to result in improved survival. However, it is associated with significant toxicity, resulting in the early discontinuation of therapy in many cases. This report quantifies and analyzes the reasons why patients discontinue therapy before completion and discusses strategies for improvement.

METHODS

One hundred seventy-seven women with ovarian cancer who received IP chemotherapy for a 10-year period at a regional cancer center were followed, and demographic and treatment data were collected. SigmaStat (v2.0) was used to make statistical calculations regarding the data.

RESULTS

One hundred seventy-seven subjects received 915 cycles of IP therapy. One hundred forty subjects received IP chemotherapy as initial treatment. Ninety-five (68%) of the 140 subjects completed 6 planned cycles. Thirty-seven subjects received IP for recurrent disease. Only 14 (38%) of the 37 subjects completed 6 cycles (P = 0.001). The most common reason for noncompletion of IP therapy was port occlusion (39/68 of the patients, 57%). Very few subjects refused treatment (9/68 of the patients, 13%). The rate of completion of therapy improved over time in this program (2001, 36%; 2009, 75%).

CONCLUSIONS

The rate of completion of IP chemotherapy was higher in this institution than in other reports, including randomized multicenter trials. Port occlusion was the most common reason why IP chemotherapy was not completed. Subjective reasons for stopping therapy were rare. The establishment of a comprehensive, coordinated IP administration program is likely to result in improved completion rates. Completion rates within an institution improve with experience as well.

The role of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in treating advanced epithelial ovarian cancer

The current management of advanced ovarian cancer consists of aggressive primary cytoreductive surgery (PCS) followed by combination platinum based chemotherapy. Recent studies have suggested that platinum-based chemotherapy may be of benefit in patients with advanced ovarian cancer prior to cytoreductive surgery (neoadjuvant chemotherapy, NACT). The concept of NACT has not been completely validated in the treatment of ovarian cancer. This review will discuss the role of NACT in patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer.

Chemotherapy resistance as a predictor of progression-free survival in ovarian cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and surgical cytoreduction followed by intraperitoneal chemotherapy: a Southwest Oncology Group Study

PURPOSE

In vitro testing of the activity of chemotherapeutic agents has been suggested as 1 method to optimally select drugs for patients with ovarian cancer. There are limited prospectively obtained data examining the clinical utility of this approach. We sought to obtain a preliminary assessment of this strategy in a trial that examined the administration of neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgical cytoreduction and intraperitoneal chemotherapy in women with advanced ovarian cancer.

METHODS

Women with stage III/IV epithelial ovarian carcinoma that presented with large-volume disease were treated with neoadjuvant intravenous paclitaxel and carboplatin for three 21-day cycles followed by cytoreductive surgery. If optimally debulked, patients received intravenous paclitaxel, intraperitoneal carboplatin and intraperitoneal paclitaxel for six 28-day cycles. Tumor cloning assay results (Oncotech) were correlated with progression-free survival.

RESULTS

Sixty-two patients (58 eligible) were registered from March 2001 to February 2006. Thirty-six eligible patients had interval debulking and 26 received postcytoreduction chemotherapy. Twenty-two patients had tumor cloning assay results available. The clinical features of this population were similar to those of the larger group of women who entered this study. There was no difference in progression-free survival between patients whose cancers were defined as 'resistant' or 'nonresistant' to either platinum or paclitaxel.

CONCLUSIONS

While the small patient numbers in this trial do not permit definitive conclusions, these data fail to provide support for the argument that prospectively obtained in vitro data regarding platinum or paclitaxel resistance will be highly predictive of clinical outcome in advanced ovarian cancer.