Prise en charge chirurgicale du cancer épithélial de l'ovaire - première ligne et première rechute: Surgical management of epithelial ovarian cancer - first line and first relapse

Based on recently published data, these recommendations present some evolutions in the surgical management of high grade epithelial ovarian cancers. In apparently early stages (FIGO I and II), surgical staging must be undertaken to confirm the absence of both peritoneal lesions and lymph node involvement (that might change stage and management). Neoadjuvant chemotherapy is not indicated, surgical exploration should be performed upfront, by laparotomy, to reduce the risk of rupture of the primary tumor. In advanced stages, the first step is to evaluate the feasibility of primary surgery with complete tumor cytoreduction. If it appears unfeasible, 3 or 4 cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy are administered before interval surgey. Whether it is implemented in the primary or interval setting, surgery must be performed by experimented teams, in an approved facility, having developed a rehabilitation program. Lymph node dissection is not mandatory if no adenopathies have been identified by imaging and by peroperative palpation. At first relapse, the surgical decision must be made by a multidisciplinary team, using scores predictive of complete cytoreduction (AGO or iMODEL criteria). Similarly as in first line, the objective is to achieve resection without any residual disease. Surveillance after first-line treatment must be adapted, according to the probability of another complete cytoreduction in case of late relapse, especially in patients who benefited from primary complete surgery and maintained good performance status.

[Retrospective study: Late surgery post chemotherapy versus after 3-4 cures in treatment of advanced ovarian cancer]

INTRODUCTION

Treatment in locally advanced ovarian cancer is optimal surgery followed by chemotherapy. Patients with significant tumor spread, OMS>2, age>75 years old are poor candidates for aggressive primary surgery. Interval surgery, after neo-adjuvant chemotherapy, aims to achieve more complete surgery, increase survival, and reduce surgical morbidity. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival. Secondary outcomes were overall survival and postoperative morbidity and mortality.

METHOD

This is a retrospective study conducted in 2 French referral centers between January 2000 and December 2015. Patients who could not benefit from a complete initial surgery were operated after 3 cures of chemotherapy at the François Baclesse center and after least 5 cures at the center René Gauducheau.

RESULTS

The population analyzed included 104 patients, 43 (41.0%) patients treated at the René Gauducheau center (group 1) and 61 (59.0%) patients treated at the François Baclesse center (group 2). Progression-free and overall survival were similar between the 2 groups, they were, respectively, 15.9 months and 34 months in group 1 vs. 15.4 months and 37.6 months in group 2 (P=0.72; P=0.65). Mean hospital stay and postoperative morbidity were similar in both groups.

CONCLUSION

For weak patients, to limit invasive surgery, doing more than 5 courses of chemotherapy may be a reasonable option.