To compare the optimal cytoreduction rate in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer stage III/IV after 3 versus 6 cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy

Predicting Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Response and High-Grade Serous Ovarian Cancer From CT Images in Ovarian Cancer with Multitask Deep Learning: A Multicenter Study

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

Accurate prediction neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) response in ovarian cancer (OC) is essential for personalized medicine. We aimed to develop and validate a deep learning (DL) model based on pretreatment contrast-enhanced CT (CECT) images for predicting NACT responses and classifying high-grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSOC) to identify patients who may benefit from NACT.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This multicenter study, which contained both retrospective and prospective studies, included consecutive OC patients (n = 757) from three hospitals. Using WHO RECIST 1.1 for the reference standard, a total of 587 women with 1761 images were included in the training and validation sets, 67 women with 201 images were included in the prospective sets, and 103 women with 309 images were included in the external sets. A multitask DL model based on the multiperiod CT image was developed to predict NACT response and HGSOC.

RESULTS

Logistic regression analysis showed that peritoneal invasion, retinal invasion, and inguinal lymph node metastasis were independent predictors. The DL achieved promising segmentation performances with DICEmean= 0.83 (range: 0.78-0.87). For predicting NACT response, the DL model combined with clinical risk factors obtained area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUCs) of 0.87 (0.83-0.89), 0.88 (0.86-0.91), 0.86 (0.82-0.89), and 0.79 (0.75-0.82) in the training, validation, prospective, and external sets, respectively. The AUCs were 0.91 (0.87-0.94), 0.89 (0.86-0.91), 0.80 (0.76-0.84), and 0.80 (0.75-0.85) in four sets in HGSOC classification.

CONCLUSION

The multitask DL model developed using multiperiod CT images exhibited a promising performance for predicting NACT response and HGSOC with OC, which could provide valuable information for individualized treatment.

Post-operative residual disease and number of cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in advanced epithelial ovarian carcinoma

BACKGROUND

The optimal number of neoadjuvant chemotherapy cycles in patients with advanced ovarian cancer is still disputed.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the impact of the number of neoadjuvant chemotherapy cycles and role of optimal cytoreduction on the prognosis of patients with advanced ovarian cancer.

METHODS

Clinical and pathological details were examined. Patients were evaluated combining the number of cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy-namely, 'interval debulking surgery' after up to four neoadjuvant chemotherapy cycles, and 'delayed debulking surgery' after more than four cycles of therapy.

RESULTS

A total of 286 patients were included in the study. Complete cytoreduction with no residual peritoneal disease (CC0) was achieved in 74 (74%) patients with interval debulking surgery and 124 (66.7%) patients with delayed interval debulking. Of those with residual disease, there were 26/88 (29.5%) patients in the interval debulking surgery group and 62/88 (70.5%) patients in the delayed debulking surgery group. Comparison of patients with delayed debulking-CC0 and interval debulking-CC0 showed no difference in progression-free survival (p=0.3) or overall survival (p=0.4), while significantly worse outcomes were observed in patients with interval debulking-CC1 (p=0.02 and p=0.04, respectively). Specifically, patients with interval debulking-CC1 had an approximately 67% increased risk of disease progression (p=0.04; HR=2.01 (95% CI 1.04 to 4.18)) and a 69% higher risk of death than patients with delayed debulking-CC0 (p=0.03; HR=2.34 (95% CI 1.11 to 4.67)).

CONCLUSION

Increasing the number of neoadjuvant chemotherapy cycles does not worsen patient outcomes if complete resection is achieved. Nevertheless, additional prospective trials are necessary to establish the optimum number of neoadjuvant chemotherapy cycles.

Prediction for 2-year mortality of metastatic ovarian cancer patients based on surveillance, epidemiology, and end results database

Aim

To establish prediction models for 2-year overall survival of ovarian cancer patients with metastasis.

Methods

In total, 4,929 participants from Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database were randomly divided into the training set (n = 3,451) and the testing set (n = 1,478). Univariate and multivariable regression were conducted in the training set to identify predictors for 2-year overall survival of metastatic ovarian cancer patients. The C-index was calculated for assessing the performance of the models. The nomogram for the model was plotted. The prediction value of the model was validated in the testing set. Subgroup analysis were performed concerning surgery and chemotherapy status of patients and the metastatic site of ovarian cancer in the testing set. The calibration curves were plotted and the decision curve analysis (DCA) were conducted.

Results

At the end of follow-up, 2,587 patients were survived and 2,342 patients were dead within 2 years. The 2-year survival rate was 52.5%. The prediction models were constructed based on predictors including age, radiation, surgery and chemotherapy, CA125, and bone, liver, and lung metastasis. The prediction model for 2-year overall survival of ovarian cancer patients with metastasis showed good predictive ability with the C-index of the model of 0.719 (95% CI: 0.706–0.731) in the training set and 0.718 (95% CI: 0.698–0.737) in the testing set. In terms of patients with bone metastasis, the C-index was 0.740 (95% CI: 0.652–0.828) for predicting the 2-year overall survival of ovarian cancer patients. The C-index was 0.836 (95% CI: 0.694–0.979) in patients with brain metastasis, 0.755 (95% CI: 0.721–0.788) in patients with liver metastasis and 0.725 (95% CI: 0.686–0.764) in those with lung metastasis for predicting the 2-year overall survival of ovarian cancer patients.

Conclusion

The models showed good predictive performance for 2-year overall survival of metastatic ovarian cancer patients.

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.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy before surgery versus surgery followed by chemotherapy for initial treatment in advanced ovarian epithelial cancer

BACKGROUND

Epithelial ovarian cancer presents at an advanced stage in the majority of women. These women require a combination of surgery and chemotherapy for optimal treatment. Conventional treatment has been to perform surgery first and then give chemotherapy. However, there may be advantages to using chemotherapy before surgery.

OBJECTIVES

To assess whether there is an advantage to treating women with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer with chemotherapy before debulking surgery (neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT)) compared with conventional treatment where chemotherapy follows debulking surgery (primary debulking surgery (PDS)).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases up to 9 October 2020: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Embase via Ovid, MEDLINE (Silver Platter/Ovid), PDQ and MetaRegister. We also checked the reference lists of relevant papers that were identified to search for further studies. The main investigators of relevant trials were contacted for further information.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of women with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (Federation of International Gynaecologists and Obstetricians (FIGO) stage III/IV) who were randomly allocated to treatment groups that compared platinum-based chemotherapy before cytoreductive surgery with platinum-based chemotherapy following cytoreductive surgery.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias in each included trial. We extracted data of overall (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), adverse events, surgically-related mortality and morbidity and quality of life outcomes.  We used GRADE methods to determine the certainty of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 2227 titles and abstracts through our searches, of which five RCTs of varying quality and size met the inclusion criteria. These studies assessed a total of 1774 women with stage IIIc/IV ovarian cancer randomised to NACT followed by interval debulking surgery (IDS) or PDS followed by chemotherapy. We pooled results of the four studies where data were available and found little or no difference with regard to overall survival (OS) (Hazard Ratio (HR) 0.96, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.08; participants = 1692; studies = 4; high-certainty evidence) or progression-free survival in four trials where we were able to pool data (Hazard Ratio 0.98, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.08; participants = 1692; studies = 4; moderate-certainty evidence). Adverse events, surgical morbidity and quality of life (QoL) outcomes were variably and incompletely reported across studies. There are probably clinically meaningful differences in favour of NACT compared to PDS with regard to overall postoperative serious adverse effects (SAE grade 3+): 6% in NACT group, versus 29% in PDS group, (risk ratio (RR) 0.22, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.38; participants = 435; studies = 2; heterogeneity index (I²) = 0%; moderate-certainty evidence). NACT probably results in a large reduction in the need for stoma formation: 5.9% in NACT group, versus 20.4% in PDS group, (RR 0.29, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.74; participants = 632; studies = 2; I² = 70%; moderate-certainty evidence), and probably reduces the risk of needing bowel resection at the time of surgery: 13.0% in NACT group versus 26.6% in PDS group (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.79; participants = 1565; studies = 4; I² = 79%; moderate-certainty evidence). NACT reduces postoperative mortality: 0.6% in NACT group, versus 3.6% in PDS group, (RR 0.16, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.46; participants = 1623; studies = 5; I² = 0%; high-certainty evidence). QoL on the European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) scale produced inconsistent and imprecise results in three studies (MD -0.29, 95% CI -2.77 to 2.20; participants = 524; studies = 3; I² = 81%; very low-certainty evidence) but the evidence is very uncertain and should be interpreted with caution.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The available high to moderate-certainty evidence suggests there is little or no difference in primary survival outcomes between PDS and NACT. NACT probably reduces the risk of serious adverse events, especially those around the time of surgery, and reduces the risk of postoperative mortality and the need for stoma formation. These data will inform women and clinicians (involving specialist gynaecological multidisciplinary teams) and allow treatment to be tailored to the person, taking into account surgical resectability, age, histology, stage and performance status. Data from an unpublished study and ongoing studies are awaited.