Laparoscopy to predict the result of primary cytoreductive surgery in advanced ovarian cancer patients (LapOvCa-trial): a multicentre randomized controlled study

The role of minimally invasive surgery in gynaecological cancer: an overview of current trends

Background

The capabilities of minimally invasive surgery, either as conventional laparoscopy, or as robotic surgery, have increased to an extent that it enables complex operations in the field of gynaecological oncology.

Objective

To document the role of minimally invasive gynaecological surgery in cancer.

Materials and methods

A review of the literature that shaped international guidelines and clinical practice.

Main outcome measures

Current guidelines of major international scientific associations and trends in accepted clinical practice.

Results

In recent years, evidence on oncologic outcome has limited the role of minimally invasive techniques in cervical cancer, while the treatment of early endometrial cancer with laparoscopy and robotic surgery has become the international standard. In ovarian cancer, the role of minimally invasive surgery is still limited. Current evidence on perioperative morbidity underlines the necessity to implicate minimally invasive techniques whenever possible.

Conclusion

The optimal surgical route for the treatment of gynaecological cancer remains in many cases controversial. The role of minimally invasive surgery remains increasing in the course of time.

What is new?

This comprehensive review offers an entire perspective on the current role of minimally invasive surgery in gynaecological cancer therapy.

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.

Chemotherapy versus surgery 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 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 on 11 February 2019: 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.

MAIN RESULTS

We found 1952 potential titles, with a most recent search date of February 2019, of which five RCTs of varying quality and size met the inclusion criteria. These studies assessed a total of 1713 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 three studies where data were available and found little or no difference with regard to overall survival (OS) (1521 women; Hazard Ratio (HR) 0.95, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.07; I2 = 0%; moderate-certainty evidence) or progression-free survival in four trials where we were able to pool data (1631 women; HR 0.97, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.07; I2 = 0%; moderate-certainty evidence). Adverse events, surgical morbidity and quality of life (QoL) outcomes were poorly and incompletely reported across studies. There may be clinically meaningful differences in favour of NACT compared to PDS with regard to serious adverse effects (SAE grade 3+). These data suggest that NACT may reduce the risk of need for blood transfusion (risk ratio (RR) 0.80; 95% CI 0.64 to 0.99; four studies,1085 women; low-certainty evidence), venous thromboembolism (RR 0.28; 95% CI 0.09 to 0.90; four studies, 1490 women; low-certainty evidence), infection (RR 0.30; 95% CI 0.16 to 0.56; four studies, 1490 women; moderate-certainty evidence), compared to PDS. NACT probably reduces the need for stoma formation (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.72; two studies, 581 women; moderate-certainty evidence) and bowel resection (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.92; three studies, 1213 women; moderate-certainty evidence), as well as reducing postoperative mortality (RR 0.18; 95% CI 0.06 to 0.54:five studies, 1571 women; moderate-certainty evidence). QoL on the EORTC QLQ-C30 scale produced inconsistent and imprecise results in two studies (MD -1.34, 95% CI -2.36 to -0.32; participants = 307; very low-certainty evidence) and use of the QLQC-30 and QLQC-Ov28 in another study (MD 7.60, 95% CI 1.89 to 13.31; participants = 217; very low-certainty evidence) meant that little could be inferred.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The available moderate-certainty evidence suggests there is little or no difference in primary survival outcomes between PDS and NACT. NACT may reduce the risk of serious adverse events, especially those around the time of surgery, and the need for bowel resection and stoma formation. These data will inform women and clinicians 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.

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.

A Prediction Model for Optimal Primary Debulking Surgery Based on Preoperative Computed Tomography Scans and Clinical Factors in Patients With Advanced Ovarian Cancer: A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study

Objective

This study assessed the predictive value of preoperative computed tomography (CT) scans and clinical factors for optimal debulking surgery (ODS) in patients with advanced ovarian cancer (AOC).

Methods

Patients with AOC in International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage III-IV who underwent primary debulking surgery (PDS) between 2016 and 2019 from nine tertiary Chinese hospitals were included. Large-volume ascites, diffuse peritoneal thickening, omental cake, retroperitoneal lymph node enlargement (RLNE) below and above the inferior mesenteric artery (IMA), and suspected pelvic bowel, abdominal bowel, liver surface, liver parenchyma and portal, spleen, diaphragm and pleural lesions were evaluated on CT. Preoperative factors included age, platelet count, and albumin and CA125 levels.

Results

Overall, 296 patients were included, and 250 (84.5%) underwent ODS. The prediction model included age >60 years (P=0.016; prediction index value, PIV=1), a CA125 level >800 U/ml (P=0.033, PIV=1), abdominal bowel metastasis (P=0.034, PIV=1), spleen metastasis (P<0.001, PIV=2), diaphragmatic metastasis (P=0.014, PIV=2), and an RLNE above the IMA (P<0.001, PIV=2). This model had superior discrimination (AUC=0.788>0.750), and the Hosmer-Lemeshow test indicated its stable calibration (P=0.600>0.050). With the aim of maximizing the accuracy of prediction and minimizing the rate of inappropriate explorations, a total PIV ≥5 achieved the highest accuracy of 85.47% and identified patients who underwent suboptimal PDS with a specificity of 100%.

Conclusions

We developed a prediction model based on two preoperative clinical factors and four radiological criteria to predict unsatisfactory debulking surgery in patients with AOC. The accuracy of this prediction model needs to be validated and adjusted in further multicenter prospective studies.

Frontline Management of Epithelial Ovarian Cancer-Combining Clinical Expertise with Community Practice Collaboration and Cutting-Edge Research

Epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) is the most common histology of ovarian cancer defined as epithelial cancer derived from the ovaries, fallopian tubes, or primary peritoneum. It is the fifth most common cause of cancer-related death in women in the United States. Because of a lack of effective screening and non-specific symptoms, EOC is typically diagnosed at an advanced stage (FIGO stage III or IV) and approximately one third of patients have malignant ascites at initial presentation. The treatment of ovarian cancer consists of a combination of cytoreductive surgery and systemic chemotherapy. Despite the advances with new cytotoxic and targeted therapies, the five-year survival rate for all-stage EOC in the United States is 48.6%. Delivery of up-to-date guideline care and multidisciplinary team efforts are important drivers of overall survival. In this paper, we review our frontline management of EOC that relies on a multi-disciplinary approach drawing on clinical expertise and collaboration combined with community practice and cutting edge clinical and translational research. By optimizing partnerships through team medicine and clinical research, we combine our cancer center clinical expertise, community practice partnership, and clinical and translational research to understand the biology of this deadly disease, advance therapy and connect our patients with the optimal treatment that offers the best possible outcomes.

Survival outcome and perioperative complication related to neoadjuvant chemotherapy with carboplatin and paclitaxel for advanced ovarian cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effectiveness and safety of neoadjuvant chemotherapy with carboplatin/paclitaxel followed by interval debulking surgery (NACT-IDS) to primary debulking surgery plus postoperative chemotherapy (PDS) for advanced ovarian cancer.

METHODS

A comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted by an Expert Panel of the Japan Society of Gynecologic Oncology Ovarian Cancer Committee. Multiple public search engines including PubMed/MEDLINE and the Cochrane Database, were searched in March 2019 using the entry keywords "ovarian cancer [all fields]" AND "interval debulking surgery [all fields]", AND "neoadjuvant chemotherapy [all fields]". Key inclusion criteria were prospective clinical trials examining platinum-based NACT for stage II-IV epithelial ovarian cancer. The primary outcome of interest was survival, and the secondary outcome was adverse events with each intervention.

RESULTS

After screening 333 studies, four phase III randomized clinical trials were identified that met the inclusion criteria. These trials included 1692 women (847 receiving NACT-IDS and 845 receiving PDS). It was found that NACT-IDS and PDS had similar overall survival (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.97, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.87-1.07, P = 0.53) and progression-free survival (HR: 0.98, 95%CI: 0.90-1.08, P = 0.74). In contrast, NACT-IDS was associated with significantly lower rates of perioperative complications (odds ratio [OR] 0.27, 95%CI: 0.20-0.36, P < 0.001) and perioperative mortality (OR: 0.17, 95%CI: 0.06-0.50, P < 0.001) compared to PDS.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review and meta-analysis suggests that NACT-IDS with carboplatin and paclitaxel does not negatively impact the survival of women with advanced ovarian cancer compared to PDS, while perioperative complications and mortality are significantly reduced by 70-80%.

Chemotherapy versus surgery 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 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 on 11 February 2019: 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.

MAIN RESULTS

We found 1952 potential titles, with a most recent search date of February 2019, of which five RCTs of varying quality and size met the inclusion criteria. These studies assessed a total of 1713 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 three studies where data were available and found little or no difference with regard to overall survival (OS) (1521 women; hazard ratio (HR) 1.06; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.94 to 1.19, I2 = 0%; moderate-certainty evidence) or progression-free survival in four trials where we were able to pool data (1631 women; HR 1.02; 95% CI 0.92 to 1.13, I2 = 0%; moderate-certainty evidence). Adverse events, surgical morbidity and quality of life (QoL) outcomes were poorly and incompletely reported across studies. There may be clinically meaningful differences in favour of NACT compared to PDS with regard to serious adverse effects (SAE grade 3+). These data suggest that NACT may reduce the risk of need for blood transfusion (risk ratio (RR) 0.80; 95% CI 0.64 to 0.99; four studies,1085 women; low-certainty evidence), venous thromboembolism (RR 0.28; 95% CI 0.09 to 0.90; four studies, 1490 women; low-certainty evidence), infection (RR 0.30; 95% CI 0.16 to 0.56; four studies, 1490 women; moderate-certainty evidence), compared to PDS. NACT probably reduces the need for stoma formation (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.72; two studies, 581 women; moderate-certainty evidence) and bowel resection (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.92; three studies, 1213 women; moderate-certainty evidence), as well as reducing postoperative mortality (RR 0.18; 95% CI 0.06 to 0.54:five studies, 1571 women; moderate-certainty evidence). QoL on the EORTC QLQ-C30 scale produced inconsistent and imprecise results in two studies (MD -1.34, 95% CI -2.36 to -0.32; participants = 307; very low-certainty evidence) and use of the QLQC-30 and QLQC-Ov28 in another study (MD 7.60, 95% CI 1.89 to 13.31; participants = 217; very low-certainty evidence) meant that little could be inferred.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The available moderate-certainty evidence suggests there is little or no difference in primary survival outcomes between PDS and NACT. NACT may reduce the risk of serious adverse events, especially those around the time of surgery, and the need for bowel resection and stoma formation. These data will inform women and clinicians 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.

Laparoscopy vs. laparotomy for advanced ovarian cancer: a systematic review of the literature

INTRODUCTION

In the last decade, laparoscopy has been progressively introduced in the management of advanced-stage ovarian cancer (AOC) to evaluate tumor resectability, avoiding an explorative laparotomy, to identify non-responders to submit to second-line chemotherapy and to perform primary or interval minimally invasive debulking surgery in selected patients. This review aims to deeply focus on the differences between laparoscopy and laparotomy in the management of advanced ovarian cancer.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

The electronic database search provided a total of 80 results. Out of these, 63 results were excluded because considered not relevant to the review, for linguistic reasons or case reports. A total of 17 articles were considered eligible for the review.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Many studies have assessed the value of laparoscopy in predicting the optimal resectability of AOC patients avoiding exploratory laparotomies. More recently, its role in primary and interval cytoreduction has been investigated for selected patients in terms of safety, feasibility and oncological outcomes. Published data are comparable to the standard laparotomic management in terms of oncological outcomes but with improved perioperative and psychological results. The selection of patients is crucial to perform a successful surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

To date, laparoscopy has replaced the primary laparotomic approach in the evaluation of optimal resectability. As far as primary and interval minimally invasive debulking surgery are concerned, instead, most of the works report an overlap of oncological outcomes compared to traditional surgery. The selection of patients is a crucial point to reach a successful minimally invasive surgical treatment, taking into account surgical complexity and surgical adequacy.

Laparoscopy for diagnosing resectability of disease in women with advanced ovarian cancer

BACKGROUND

This is an update of a Cochrane Review that was originally published in 2014, Issue 2.The presence of residual disease after primary debulking surgery is a highly significant prognostic factor in women with advanced ovarian cancer. In up to 60% of women, residual tumour of > 1 cm is left behind after primary debulking surgery (defined as suboptimal debulking). These women might have benefited from neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) prior to interval debulking surgery instead of primary debulking surgery followed by chemotherapy. It is therefore important to select accurately those women who would best be treated with primary debulking surgery followed by chemotherapy from those who would benefit from NACT prior to surgery.

OBJECTIVES

To determine if performing a laparoscopy, in addition to conventional diagnostic work-up, in women suspected of advanced ovarian cancer is accurate in predicting the resectability of disease.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2018, Issue 6) in the Cochrane Library; MEDLINE via Ovid, Embase via Ovid, MEDION and Science Citation Index and Conference Proceedings Citation Index (ISI Web of Science) to July 2018. We also checked references of identified primary studies and review articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included studies that evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of laparoscopy to determine the resectability of disease in women who are suspected of advanced ovarian cancer and planned to receive primary debulking surgery.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Pairs of review authors independently assessed the quality of included studies using QUADAS-2 and extracted data on study and participant characteristics, index test, target condition and reference standard. We extracted data for two-by-two tables and summarised these graphically. We calculated sensitivity and specificity and negative predictive values.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 18 studies, reporting on 14 cohorts of women (including 1563 participants), of which one was a randomised controlled trial (RCT). Laparoscopic assessment suggested that disease was suitable for optimal debulking surgery (no macroscopic residual disease or residual disease < 1 cm (negative predictive values)) in 54% to 96% of women who had macroscopic complete debulking surgery (no visible disease at end of laparotomy) and in 69% to 100% of women who had optimal debulking surgery (residual tumour < 1 cm at end of laparotomy).Only two studies avoided partial verification bias by operating on all women independent of laparoscopic findings, and provided data to calculate sensitivity and specificity. These two studies had no false positive laparoscopies (i.e. no women had a laparoscopy indicating unresectable disease and then went on to have optimal debulking surgery (no disease > 1 cm remaining)).Due to the large heterogeneity pooling of the data was not possible for meta-analysis.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopy may be a useful tool to identify those women who have unresectable disease, as no women were inappropriately unexplored. However, some women had suboptimal primary debulking surgery, despite laparoscopy predicting optimal debulking and data are at high risk of verification bias as only two studies performed the reference standard (debulking laparotomy) in test (laparoscopy)-positive women. Using a prediction model does not increase the sensitivity and will result in more unnecessarily explored women, due to a lower specificity.

Evaluation of effectiveness of the PlasmaJet surgical device in the treatment of advanced stage ovarian cancer (PlaComOv-study): study protocol of a randomized controlled trial in the Netherlands

BACKGROUND

The most important goal for survival benefit of advanced stage ovarian cancer is to surgically remove all visible tumour, because complete cytoreductive surgery (CCS) has been shown to be associated with prolonged survival. In a remarkable number of women, CCS is very challenging. Especially in women with many small metastases on the peritoneum and intestinal surface, conventional CCS with electrosurgery is not able to be "complete" in removing safely all visible tumour. In this randomized controlled trail (RCT) we investigate whether the use of the PlasmaJet Surgical Device increases the rate of CCS, and whether this indeed leads to a longer progression free and overall survival. The main research question is: does the use of the PlasmaJet Surgical Device in surgery for advanced stage ovarian cancer result in an increased number of complete cytoreductive surgeries when compared with conventional surgical techniques. Secondary study objectives are: 30-day morbidity, duration of surgery, blood loss, length of hospitalisation, Quality of Life, disease-free survival, overall survival, percentage colostomy, cost-effectiveness.

METHODS

The study design is a multicentre single-blinded superiority RCT in two university and nine non-university hospitals in The Netherlands. Three hundred and thirty women undergoing cytoreductive surgery for advanced stage ovarian carcinoma (FIGO Stage IIIB-IV) will be randomized into two arms: use of the PlasmaJet (intervention group) versus the use of standard surgical instruments combined with electrocoagulation (control group). The primary outcome is the rate of complete cytoreductive surgery in both groups. Secondary study objectives are: 30-day morbidity, duration of surgery, blood loss, length of hospitalisation, Quality of Life, disease-free survival, overall survival, percentage colostomy, cost-effectiveness. Quality of life will be evaluated using validated questionnaires at baseline, at 1 and 6 months after surgery and at 1, 2, 3 and 4 years after surgery.

DISCUSSION

We hypothesize the additional value of the use of the PlasmaJet in CCS for advanced stage epithelial ovarian cancer. More knowledge about efficacy, side effects, recurrence rates, cost effectiveness and pathology findings after using the PlasmaJet Device is advocated. This RCT may aid in this void.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Dutch Trial Register NTR6624 . Registered 18 August 2017. Medical Ethical Committee approval number: NL62035.078.17 (Medical Ethical Committee Erasmus Medical Centre Rotterdam).

New Developments in Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Oncology Surgery

Minimally invasive surgery continues to transform the field of gynecologic oncology and has now become the standard of care for many early-stage malignancies. The proven benefits of minimally invasive surgery are driving the rapid introduction and dissemination of novel technologies and the increasing ability to perform even the most complex procedures less invasively. In this article, we will review the current literature on traditional multiport laparoscopy, robotic-assisted laparoscopy, laparoendoscopic single-site surgery as well as robotic-assisted laparoendoscopic single-site surgery, with a specific focus on their role in the treatment of gynecologic malignancies.

Meigs to modern times: The evolution of debulking surgery in advanced ovarian cancer

Joe V. Meigs was a visionary clinician and an early adopter of radical techniques in the surgical treatment of ovarian cancer. His 1934 textbook "Tumors of the Female Pelvic Organs", consolidated his approach to this "hopeless" disease, with pearls on diagnosis, outcomes, and even speculations about the benefits of minimally invasive surgery. Decades before adjuvant chemotherapy would prove of value, and in an era when sophisticated statistics were unheard of, he nonetheless tried to eke out what benefits he could using the methods available in his time. We transition his original findings and observations through the advent of platinum-based chemotherapy, retrospective cohort studies supporting the benefits of primary debulking, and finally the long-awaited randomized controlled trial. We aim to provide historical context for the underpinnings of how cytoreductive surgery has evolved into its current role in the treatment of advanced ovarian cancer.

Predictive modeling for determination of microscopic residual disease at primary cytoreduction: An NRG Oncology/Gynecologic Oncology Group 182 Study

OBJECTIVE

Microscopic residual disease following complete cytoreduction (R0) is associated with a significant survival benefit for patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). Our objective was to develop a prediction model for R0 to support surgeons in their clinical care decisions.

METHODS

Demographic, pathologic, surgical, and CA125 data were collected from GOG 182 records. Patients enrolled prior to September 1, 2003 were used for the training model while those enrolled after constituted the validation data set. Univariate analysis was performed to identify significant predictors of R0 and these variables were subsequently analyzed using multivariable regression. The regression model was reduced using backward selection and predictive accuracy was quantified using area under the receiver operating characteristic area under the curve (AUC) in both the training and the validation data sets.

RESULTS

Of the 3882 patients enrolled in GOG 182, 1480 had complete clinical data available for the analysis. The training data set consisted of 1007 patients (234 with R0) while the validation set was comprised of 473 patients (122 with R0). The reduced multivariable regression model demonstrated several variables predictive of R0 at cytoreduction: Disease Score (DS) (p<0.001), stage (p=0.009), CA125 (p<0.001), ascites (p<0.001), and stage-age interaction (p=0.01). Applying the prediction model to the validation data resulted in an AUC of 0.73 (0.67 to 0.78, 95% CI). Inclusion of DS enhanced the model performance to an AUC of 0.83 (0.79 to 0.88, 95% CI).

CONCLUSIONS

We developed and validated a prediction model for R0 that offers improved performance over previously reported models for prediction of residual disease. The performance of the prediction model suggests additional factors (i.e. imaging, molecular profiling, etc.) should be explored in the future for a more clinically actionable tool.

Laparoscopy to Predict the Result of Primary Cytoreductive Surgery in Patients With Advanced Ovarian Cancer: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Purpose To investigate whether initial diagnostic laparoscopy can prevent futile primary cytoreductive surgery (PCS) by identifying patients with advanced-stage ovarian cancer in whom > 1 cm of residual disease will be left after PCS. Patients and Methods This multicenter, randomized controlled trial was undertaken within eight gynecologic cancer centers in the Netherlands. Patients with suspected advanced-stage ovarian cancer who qualified for PCS were eligible. Participating patients were randomly assigned to either laparoscopy or PCS. Laparoscopy was used to guide selection of primary treatment: either primary surgery or neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by interval surgery. The primary outcome was futile laparotomy, defined as a PCS with residual disease of > 1 cm. Primary analyses were performed according to the intention-to-treat principle. Results Between May 2011 and February 2015, 201 participants were included, of whom 102 were assigned to diagnostic laparoscopy and 99 to primary surgery. In the laparoscopy group, 63 (62%) of 102 patients underwent PCS versus 93 (94%) of 99 patients in the primary surgery group. Futile laparotomy occurred in 10 (10%) of 102 patients in the laparoscopy group versus 39 (39%) of 99 patients in the primary surgery group (relative risk, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.13 to 0.47; P < .001). In the laparoscopy group, three (3%) of 102 patients underwent both primary and interval surgery compared with 28 (28%) of 99 patients in the primary surgery group ( P < .001). Conclusion Diagnostic laparoscopy reduced the number of futile laparotomies in patients with suspected advanced-stage ovarian cancer. In women with a plan for PCS, these data suggest that performance of diagnostic laparoscopy first is reasonable and that if cytoreduction to < 1 cm of residual disease seems feasible, to proceed with PCS.

Current Recommendations for Minimally Invasive Surgical Staging in Ovarian Cancer

OPINION STATEMENT

Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) currently is performed to stage and treat ovarian cancer at different stages of disease; however, the higher level of evidence from existing studies is IIB. Despite the absence of randomized controlled trials, MIS represents a safe and adequate procedure for treating and staging early ovarian cancer, and its use has increased significantly in clinical practice. Major concerns are related to minimizing tumor disruption or dissemination, removing the adnexal mass intact, adequate retroperitoneal staging, and fertility-sparing surgery for young patients. The main goal for patients with advanced ovarian cancer is to determine the best therapeutic strategy by evaluating the risks and benefits of primary debulking surgery versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by interval debulking surgery. The use of staging laparoscopy in patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer appears to be the most researched and accepted approach. Regarding other types and stages of ovarian cancer, although the evidence is very promising, clinical trials performed by expert gynecologic oncology surgeons in referral centers are still needed to prove the efficacy of such an approach in these patients. In particular, MIS has provided an opportunity to remove localized recurrences, with both retroperitoneal and intraperitoneal diffusion.

Outcome of Epithelial Ovarian Cancer: Time for Strategy Trials to Resolve the Problem of Optimal Timing of Surgery

INTRODUCTION

The standard treatment of ovarian cancer is the combination of debulking surgery and chemotherapy. There is an ongoing discussion on which treatment is best: primary debulking surgery (PDS) or neoadjuvant chemotherapy with interval debulking (NACT-IDS). Even a large randomized trial has not settled this issue. We examined whether comparing a specified treatment protocol would not be a more logical approach to answer this type of discussions.

METHODS

A retrospective study of 142 consecutively treated patients according to a fixed protocol between 2000 and 2012 was conducted. Disease-free survival and overall survival were calculated by univariate and multivariate analyses for the whole group and for advanced stages separately. Specific differences between PDS and NACT-IDS were studied. Comparison of results from large databases was made.

RESULTS

Disease-free survival and overall 5-year survival for the whole group were 35% and 50%. For the advanced stages, disease-free survival and overall 5-year survival were 14% and 36%, with a median disease-free and overall survival of 16 and 44 months. Of the 98 women with advanced ovarian carcinoma, 54% of operable patients underwent PDS and 44% underwent NACT-IDS. More patients in the PDS group were optimally (<1 cm) debulked: 80% vs 71%. There was no significant difference in survival between PDS or NACT-IDS. Optimally debulked patients had a significant better overall survival in multivariate analysis with a hazard ratio of 2.1.

DISCUSSION

Outcome of treatment according to a fixed protocol with a mixture of PDS and NACT-IDS was similar to results from large databases. We hypothesize that comparison of a specific strategy may yield more useful results than awaiting the perfect randomized trial.

Selecting the best strategy of treatment in newly diagnosed advanced-stage ovarian cancer patients

Although it is assumed that the combination of chemotherapy and radical surgery should be indicated in all newly diagnosed advanced-stage ovarian cancer patients, one of the main raised questions is how to select the best strategy of initial treatment in this group of patients, neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by interval debulking surgery or primary debulking surgery followed by adjuvant chemotherapy. The selection criteria to offer one strategy over the other as well as a stepwise patient selection for initial treatment are described. Selecting the best strategy of treatment in newly diagnosed advanced stage ovarian cancer patients is a multifactorial and multidisciplinary decision. Several factors should be taken into consideration: (1) the disease factor, related to the extension and localization of the disease as well as tumor biology; (2) the patient factor, associated with patient age, poor performance status, and co-morbidities; and (3) institutional infrastructure factor, related to the lack of prolonged operative time, an appropriate surgical armamentarium, as well as well-equipped intensive care units with well-trained personnel.

Prognostic Value of Residual Disease after Interval Debulking Surgery for FIGO Stage IIIC and IV Epithelial Ovarian Cancer

Although complete debulking surgery for epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) is more often achieved with interval debulking surgery (IDS) following neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT), randomized evidence shows no long-term survival benefit compared to complete primary debulking surgery (PDS). We performed an observational cohort study of patients treated with debulking surgery for advanced EOC to evaluate the prognostic value of residual disease after debulking surgery. All patients treated between 1998 and 2010 in three Dutch referral gynaecological oncology centres were included. The prognostic value of residual disease after surgery for disease specific survival was assessed using Cox-regression analyses. In total, 462 patients underwent NACT-IDS and 227 PDS. Macroscopic residual disease after debulking surgery was an independent prognostic factor for survival in both treatment modalities. Yet, residual tumour less than one centimetre at IDS was associated with a survival benefit of five months compared to leaving residual tumour more than one centimetre, whereas this benefit was not seen after PDS. Leaving residual tumour at IDS is a poor prognostic sign as it is after PDS. The specific prognostic value of residual tumour seems to depend on the clinical setting, as minimal instead of gross residual tumour is associated with improved survival after IDS, but not after PDS.

Predictors of optimal cytoreduction in patients with newly diagnosed advanced-stage epithelial ovarian cancer: Time to incorporate laparoscopic assessment into the standard of care

The standard management of advanced-stage ovarian cancer has been a subject of debate, and much controversy remains as to whether patients should have primary cytoreductive surgery followed by chemotherapy or neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by interval cytoreductive surgery. In addition, there is increasing evidence that the patients who ultimately gain the most benefit from surgery are those with no residual disease at the completion of surgery (R0 resection). Therefore, to determine the best therapeutic strategy (primary cytoreductive surgery vs. neoadjuvant chemotherapy) for an individual patient, it is critically important to estimate the likelihood that primary cytoreductive surgery will leave no macroscopic residual disease. A number of studies have evaluated the use of serologic markers, such as CA-125, and imaging modalities, such as computed tomography (CT) or positron emission tomography/CT (PET/CT), to determine which patients are ideal candidates for primary cytoreductive surgery. More recently, laparoscopy has been proposed as a reliable predictor of R0 resection. In this report, we provide a review of the existing literature on the proposed criteria to predict the outcome of cytoreductive surgery and the role of laparoscopy-based scores in the management of advanced ovarian cancer.

External validation of two prediction models of complete secondary cytoreductive surgery in patients with recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to validate the performance of two prediction models, the AGO score and the Tian model, of complete secondary cytoreductive surgery (SCS) in patients with recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer. The predictive value of both models for survival controlled for the outcome of SCS was analyzed and known predictive factors for complete SCS were tested.

METHODS

A population-based database with 408 patients, who underwent SCS between 2000 and 2013 in 38 Dutch hospitals, was used. The validation cohorts for the AGO score and the model of Tian contained 273 (66.9%) and 257 (63.0%) patients, respectively.

RESULTS

The AGO score and Tian model showed a positive predictive value for complete SCS of 82.0% and 80.3% respectively, and a false negative rate of 68.5% and 55.6% respectively. A positive AGO score had no significant association with overall survival (HR 0.73; 95% CI 0.51-1.06) whereas the low risk score of the Tian model did (HR 0.62; 95% CI 0.41-0.93). A good performance status (OR 0.60; 95% CI 0.33-1.10) and the absence of ascites (OR 0.18; 95% CI 0.08-0.41) were prognostic factors for complete SCS.

CONCLUSIONS

Both the AGO score and the model of Tian showed a high positive predictive value for complete SCS but also relatively high false negative rates. However, before the two prediction models can be applied in daily clinical practice the usefulness of SCS itself has to be proven first by the three ongoing randomized controlled trials: DESKTOP III trial, the GOG 213 trial and the Dutch SOCceR trial.

Cost-effectiveness of early-initiated treatment for advanced-stage epithelial ovarian cancer patients: a modeling study

OBJECTIVE

Between diagnosis and primary treatment of patients with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC), gaps of several weeks exist. Reducing these time intervals may benefit the patient and may lead to a reduction of costs. We explored the cost-effectiveness of early-initiated treatment of patients with suspected advanced-stage EOC compared with that of current treatment.

METHODS

A discrete event simulation was used to synthesize all available evidences and to evaluate the health care costs and effects (quality-adjusted life years [QALYs]) of the 2 treatment strategies over lifetime. Overall survival, progression-free survival, health-related quality of life, and costs of the separate events were assumed to remain equal. Other uncertainties were addressed using deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

The treatment times of current and early-initiated treatment were 27 and 24 weeks, respectively. Early-initiated treatment yielded 3.42 QALYs per patient, for a total expected health care cost of €25,654. Current treatment yielded 3.40 QALYs per patient, for a total expected health care cost of €25,607. This resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €2592 per QALY gained for early-initiated treatment compared with that for current treatment. For the willingness to pay for €30,000 or more per QALY, early-initiated treatment had a 100% probability of being cost-effective compared with current treatment under the previously mentioned assumptions.

CONCLUSIONS

Given the current evidence, early-initiated treatment of patients with suspected advanced-stage EOC leads to additional QALYs and seems to be cost-effective compared with current treatment.

Role of minimally invasive surgery in ovarian cancer

The standard treatment of ovarian cancer includes upfront surgery with intent to accurately diagnose and stage the disease and to perform maximal cytoreduction, followed by chemotherapy in most cases. Surgical staging of ovarian cancer traditionally has included exploratory laparotomy with peritoneal washings, hysterectomy, salpingo-oophorectomy, omentectomy, multiple peritoneal biopsies, and possible pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy. In the early 1990s, pioneers in laparoscopic surgery used minimally invasive techniques to treat gynecologic cancers, including laparoscopic staging of early ovarian cancer and primary and secondary cytoreduction in advanced and recurrent disease in selected cases. Since then, the role of minimally invasive surgery in gynecologic oncology has been continually expanding, and today advanced laparoscopic and robotic-assisted laparoscopic techniques are used to evaluate and treat cervical and endometrial cancer. However, the important question about the place of the minimally invasive approach in surgical treatment of ovarian cancer remains to be evaluated and answered. Overall, the potential role of minimally invasive surgery in treatment of ovarian cancer is as follows: i) laparoscopic evaluation, diagnosis, and staging of apparent early ovarian cancer; ii) laparoscopic assessment of feasibility of upfront surgical cytoreduction to no visible disease; iii) laparoscopic debulking of advanced ovarian cancer; iv) laparoscopic reassessment in patients with complete remission after primary treatment; and v) laparoscopic assessment and cytoreduction of recurrent disease. The accurate diagnosis of suspect adnexal masses, the safety and feasibility of this surgical approach in early ovarian cancer, the promise of laparoscopy as the most accurate tool for triaging patients with advanced disease for surgery vs upfront chemotherapy or neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and its potential in treatment of advanced cancer have been documented and therefore should be incorporated in the surgical methods of every gynecologic oncology unit and in the training programs in gynecologic oncology.

Laparoscopy for diagnosing resectability of disease in patients with advanced ovarian cancer

BACKGROUND

The presence of residual tumour after primary debulking surgery is the most important prognostic factor in patients with advanced ovarian cancer. In up to 60% of cases, residual tumour of more than 1 cm is left behind, stressing the necessity of accurately selecting those patients who should be treated with primary debulking surgery and those who should receive neoadjuvant chemotherapy instead.

OBJECTIVES

To determine if performing an open laparoscopy after the diagnostic work-up of patients suspected of advanced ovarian cancer is accurate in predicting the resectability of disease.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), the Cochrane Register of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies, MEDION and ISI Web of Science to February 2013. Furthermore, we checked references of identified primary studies and review articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included studies that evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of laparoscopy to determine the resectability of disease in patients who are suspected of advanced ovarian cancer and planned to receive primary debulking surgery.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors assessed the quality of included studies using QUADAS-2 and extracted data on study and patients' characteristics, index test, target condition and reference standard. Data for two-by-two tables were extracted and summarised graphically. Sensitivity and specificity and negative predictive values were calculated.

MAIN RESULTS

We included seven studies reporting on six cohorts. Between 27% to 64% of included patients per study were positive on laparoscopy (too extensive disease to warrant laparotomy) and between 36% to 73% were negative (disease suitable for debulking laparotomy). Only two studies avoided partial verification bias and provided data to calculate sensitivity and specificity, which did not justify meta-analysis. These two studies had a sensitivity of 0.70 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.57 to 0.82) and 0.71 (95% CI 0.44 to 0.90); however, the specificity of both studies was 1.00 (95% CI 0.90 to 1.00). In these two studies there were no false positives, i.e. no patients for whom laparoscopy indicated that major surgery would not be successful and should be avoided, whereas, in reality the patient could be successfully operated upon. Negative predictive values (NPV), for those patients who were diagnosed with having not too extensive disease correctly identified were 0.75 (95% CI 0.55 to 0.86) and 0.96 (95% CI 0.56 to 0.99) due to a different prevalence. Although the studies did report sufficient data to calculate NPVs, we judged these estimates too heterogeneous to meta-analyse.Three studies described the development or validation of a prediction model with a clear cut-off for test positivity. Sensitivity and specificity of these prediction models were 0.30 to 0.70 and 0.89 to 1.00, respectively. However, one of these studies suffered from partial verification bias.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopy is a promising test, but the low number of studies and the differences between the included studies do not allow firm conclusions to be drawn from these data. Due to a difference in prevalence, there is a wide range in negative predictive values between studies. Two studies verified all patients. These imply a high specificity of laparoscopy in diagnosing resectability and have a good sensitivity. Both studies show that the use of criteria for unresectable disease will result in no patients inappropriately unexplored. However, there will still be patients undergoing unsuccessful primary laparotomy. Using a prediction model does not increase the sensitivity and will result in more unnecessarily explored patients, due to a lower specificity.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy and cytoreductive surgery in epithelial ovarian cancer

Ovarian cancer is one of the leading causes of death among gynecological cancers. This is because the majority of patients present with advanced stage disease. Primary debulking surgery (PDS) followed by adjuvant chemotherapy is still a mainstay of treatment. An optimal surgery, which is currently defined by leaving no gross residual tumor, is the goal of PDS. The extent of disease as well as the operative setting, including the surgeon’s skill, influences the likelihood of successful debulking. With extensive disease and a poor chance of optimal surgery or high morbidity anticipated, neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) prior to primary surgery is an option. Secondary surgery after induction chemotherapy is termed interval debulking surgery (IDS). Delayed PDS or IDS is offered to patients who show some clinical response and are without progressive disease. NACT or IDS has become more established in clinical practice and there are numerous publications regarding its advantages and disadvantages. However, data on survival are limited and inconsistent. Only one large randomized trial could demonstrate that NACT was not inferior to PDS while the few randomized trials on IDS had inconsistent results. Without a definite benefit of NACT prior to surgery over PDS, one must carefully weigh the chances of safe and successful PDS against the morbidity and risks of suboptimal surgery. Appropriate selection of a patient to undergo PDS followed by chemotherapy or, preferably, to have NACT prior to surgery is very important. Some clinical characteristics from physical examination, serum tumor markers and/or findings from imaging studies may be predictive of resectability. However, no specific features have been consistently identified in the literature. This article will address the clinical data on prediction of surgical outcomes, the role of NACT, and the role of IDS.

A multicentric trial (Olympia-MITO 13) on the accuracy of laparoscopy to assess peritoneal spread in ovarian cancer

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the study was to prospectively evaluate the accuracy of laparoscopy performed in satellite centers (SCs) to describe intraabdominal diffusion of advanced ovarian cancer (AOC).

STUDY DESIGN

Patients with a clinical/radiological suspicion of AOC were included in the protocol. SCs were selected among those surgeons, spending a short intensive training period at the coordinator center (CC) to learn the application of staging laparoscopy (S-LPS) in AOC. All women underwent S-LPS at the SCs, and the surgical procedure was recorded and blindly reviewed at the CC. Calculating specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and the accuracy for each parameter with respect to the CC assessed the diagnostic performance of S-LPS. The Cohen's kappa was used to test the interobserver agreement of each parameter.

RESULTS

One hundred sixty-eight cases were considered eligible for the study. A per-protocol analysis was performed on 120 cases. The worst laparoscopic assessable feature was mesenteric retraction, whereas the remaining variables ranged from 99.2% (peritoneal carcinomatosis) to 90% (bowel infiltration). All but 1 SC (SC number 4) reached an accuracy rate of 80% or greater for both single parameters and overall score. The Cohen's kappa and the P value for overall predicitive index value were 0.685 and .01, respectively, but improved to 0.773 and .388 after removing the SC number 4 from the analysis.

CONCLUSION

S-LPS allows an accurate and reliable assessment of intraperitoneal diffusion of disease in AOC patients in trained gynecological oncology centers.

Introduction of staging laparoscopy in the management of advanced epithelial ovarian, tubal and peritoneal cancer: impact on prognosis in a single institution experience

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the prognostic impact of routinely use of staging laparoscopy (S-LPS) in patients with primary advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (AEOC).

METHODS

All women were submitted to S-LPS before receiving primary debulking surgery (PDS) or neoadjuvant treatment (NACT). The surgical and survival outcome were evaluated by univariate and multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

Among 300 consecutive patients submitted to S-LPS no complications related to the surgical procedure were registered. The laparoscopic evaluation showed that almost half of the patients (46.3%) had a high tumor load. One-hundred forty-eight (49.3%) women were considered suitable for PDS and the remaining 152 (50.7%) were submitted to NACT. The percentages of complete (residual tumor, RT=0) and optimal (RT<1cm) cytoreduction of PDS and interval debulking surgery (IDS) were 62.1% and 57.5%, 22.5% and 27.7%, respectively, p=0.07. The post-operative complications of NACT/IDS group were lower than PDS group (p=0.01). The median progression free survival in women with RT=0 at PDS was 25 months (95% CI, 15.1-34.8), which was statistically significant longer than in all other patients, irrespective of the type of treatment they received (p=0.0001). At multivariate analysis, residual disease (p=0.011) and performance status (p=0.016) maintained an independent association with the PFS.

CONCLUSIONS

Including S-LPS in a tertiary referral center for the management AEOC does not appear to have a negative impact in terms of survival and it may be helpful to individualize the treatment avoiding unnecessary laparotomies and surgical complications.

Ovarian carcinomatosis: how the radiologist can help plan the surgical approach

Ovarian carcinoma is the most common cause of death due to gynecologic malignancy. Peritoneal involvement is present in approximately 70% of patients at the time of initial diagnosis. The disease spreads abdominally by direct extension, exfoliation of tumor cells into the peritoneal space, and dissemination of tumor cells along lymphatic pathways. Carcinomatosis characterizes an advanced stage of disease in which peritoneal disease has spread throughout the upper abdomen (stage IIIC) or in which diffuse peritoneal disease is accompanied by malignant pleural infiltration or visceral metastases (stage IV). Common sites of intraperitoneal seeding of ovarian carcinoma include the pelvis, omentum, paracolic gutters, liver capsule, and diaphragm. Soft-tissue thickening, nodularity, and enhancement are all signs of peritoneal involvement. Advanced-stage disease is treated either with initial cytoreductive surgery (debulking) followed by adjuvant chemotherapy, or with initial neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by debulking. Radiologic imaging plays an important role in the selection of patients who may benefit from neoadjuvant chemotherapy before debulking. However, accurate interpretation of the imaging findings is challenging and requires a detailed knowledge of the complex peritoneal anatomy, directionality of flow of peritoneal fluid, and specific disease sites that are likely to present particular difficulties with regard to surgical access and technique. Although there is as yet no clear consensus on the criteria for resectability of peritoneal lesions, extensive involvement of the small bowel or mesenteric root, involved lymph nodes superior to the celiac axis, pleural infiltration, pelvic sidewall invasion, bladder trigone involvement, and hepatic parenchymal metastases or implants near the right hepatic vein are considered indicative of potential nonresectability. Implants larger than 2 cm in diameter in the diaphragm, lesser sac, porta hepatis, intersegmental fissure, gallbladder fossa, or gastrosplenic or gastrohepatic ligament also may represent nonresectable disease.