Journal of surgical oncology · 2019
Upfront debulking surgery versus interval debulking surgery for advanced tubo-ovarian high-grade serous carcinoma and diffuse peritoneal metastases treated with peritonectomy procedures plus HIPEC.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Biacchi Daniele, Accarpio Fabio, Ansaloni Luca, Macrì Antonio, Ciardi Antonio, Federici Orietta, Spagnoli Alessandra, Cavaliere Davide, Vaira Marco, Sapienza Paolo, Sammartino Paolo
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Whether patients with advanced tubo-ovarian high-grade serous cancer (HGSC) fare better after upfront debulking surgery (UDS) or neoadjuvant chemotherapy with interval debulking surgery (NACT-IDS) remains controversial.
METHODS: We studied patients with HGSC who underwent UDS or NACT-IDS between July 2000 and December 2015, with peritonectomy procedures combined with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). Clinical reports were included peritoneal cancer index (PCI), NACT responses, surgical complexity score (SCS), completeness of cytoreduction (CC), complete follow-up with timing, site, and treatment of recurrence. Outcome measures were morbidity, progression-free survival (PFS), PFS2, and overall survival during a mean 5-year follow-up.
RESULTS: A total of 34 patients (23.6%) underwent UDS and 110 (76.4%) NACT-IDS both combined with HIPEC. At a median 66.3-month follow-up, patients who underwent UDS or NACT-IDS had similar outcomes. NACT subgroup responses correlated with PCI, SCS, morbidity, and CC. Patients who underwent UDS had lower recurrence rates than those who responded partly or poorly to NACT (PFS, P < .04; PFS2, P < .01). Despite HIPEC, the peritoneal disease recurred in 42.5% of the overall patients.
CONCLUSION: In patients with primary HGSC who undergo UDS or NACT-IDS, despite similar outcomes, peritonectomy procedures combined with HIPEC seem unable to prevent peritoneal recurrence.
METHODS: We studied patients with HGSC who underwent UDS or NACT-IDS between July 2000 and December 2015, with peritonectomy procedures combined with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). Clinical reports were included peritoneal cancer index (PCI), NACT responses, surgical complexity score (SCS), completeness of cytoreduction (CC), complete follow-up with timing, site, and treatment of recurrence. Outcome measures were morbidity, progression-free survival (PFS), PFS2, and overall survival during a mean 5-year follow-up.
RESULTS: A total of 34 patients (23.6%) underwent UDS and 110 (76.4%) NACT-IDS both combined with HIPEC. At a median 66.3-month follow-up, patients who underwent UDS or NACT-IDS had similar outcomes. NACT subgroup responses correlated with PCI, SCS, morbidity, and CC. Patients who underwent UDS had lower recurrence rates than those who responded partly or poorly to NACT (PFS, P < .04; PFS2, P < .01). Despite HIPEC, the peritoneal disease recurred in 42.5% of the overall patients.
CONCLUSION: In patients with primary HGSC who undergo UDS or NACT-IDS, despite similar outcomes, peritonectomy procedures combined with HIPEC seem unable to prevent peritoneal recurrence.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
AdenocarcinomaAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsChemotherapy, AdjuvantCombined Modality TherapyCystadenocarcinoma, SerousCytoreduction Surgical ProceduresFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansHyperthermia, InducedMiddle AgedNeoadjuvant TherapyNeoplasm GradingNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalOvarian NeoplasmsPeritoneal NeoplasmsPeritoneumRetrospective StudiesSurvival Rate