Defining the limits of radical cytoreductive surgery for ovarian cancer
Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, USA. Gynecologic Oncology
(Impact Factor: 3.77).
09/2011; 123(3):467-73. DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2011.08.027
Despite significant morbidity, surgical cytoreduction is the standard of care for ovarian cancer. We examined the outcomes of cytoreductive surgery to determine if there are groups of patients in which the morbidity is so substantial that alternate treatment strategies are warranted.
The Nationwide Inpatient Sample was used to identify women who underwent surgery for ovarian cancer from 1998 to 2007. The effect of age, number of radical procedures performed, and clinical characteristics on morbidity and mortality were examined.
A total of 28,651 women were identified. The complication rates increased with age from 17.1% in those <50 years of age to 29.7% in women age 70-79 and to 31.5% in those ≥ 80 (p<0.05). The number of extended procedures performed was also a predictor of morbidity; complications increased from 20.4% for women with 0 procedures to 34.0% for 1 and 44.0% for ≥ 2 procedures (p<0.0001). In multivariable analysis age, comorbidity, and the number of procedures performed were the strongest predictors of outcome. The morbidity associated with additional procedures was greatest in the elderly. Medical complications in women <50 years of age occurred in 10.2% of those who underwent 0 radical procedures vs. 23.7% in those who underwent 2 or more procedures. For women ≥ 80 years, complications were noted in 18.3% for 0 procedures, and 33.3% for 2 or more procedures.
The morbidity of cytoreduction is greatest in elderly women where the effects of age and the number of radical procedures performed have an additive effect on complication rates.
Available from: Giuseppe Comerci
- "The older patients may have had a lower survival for several reasons, including the coexistence of other pre-existing diseases or the surgeon’s propensity to limit surgery in elderly patients with comorbidities. These findings are in accordance with the literature, where it is reported that elderly women with EOC are less likely to be centralized and to undergo surgery by an oncogynecologist . "
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
Epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) is the most lethal gynecological cancer. Several hospitals throughout the region provide primary treatment for these patients and it is well know that treatment quality is correlated to the hospital that delivers. The aim of this study was to investigate the management and treatment of EOC in a Region of the North Italy (Emilia-Romagna, Italy).
A multidisciplinary group made up of 11 physicians and 3 biostatisticians was formed in 2009 to perform clinical audits in order to identify quality indicators and to develop Region-wide workup in accordance with the principles of evidence-based medicine (EBM). The rationale was that, by setting up an oncogynecology network so as to achieve the best clinical practice, critical points would decrease or even be eliminated. Analysis of cases was based on the review of the medical records.
614 EOC patients treated between 2007 and 2008 were identified. We found only 2 high-volume hospitals (≥ 21 patients/year), 3 medium-volume hospitals (11–20 operated patients/year), and 7 low-volume hospitals (≤ 10 operated patients /year). Only 222 patients (76.3%) had a histological diagnosis, FIGO surgical staging was reported only in 206 patients (70.9%) but not all standard surgical procedures were always performed, residual disease were not reported in all patients. No standard number of neoadjuvant chemotherapy cycles was observed.
The differences in terms of treatments provided led the multidisciplinary group to identify reference centers, to promote centralization, to ensure uniform and adequate treatment to patients treated in regional centers and to promote a new audit involving all regional hospitals to a complete review of the all the EOC patients.
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Ovarian cancer (OC) remains a challenge for gynecologic oncologists due to poor prognosis and increasing morbidity. About 10% of cases is hereditary and BRCA1 gene mutation-dependant. Some authors claim that clinical features, the course of the disease and prognosis of BRCA1-dependent OC vary between sporadic cases.
To analyze clinical features and disease courses of BRCA1-dependent OC in the material from Center of Oncology Cracow Branch.
Between 2004 and 2008, 66 mutations of BRCA1 gene were found in patients with OC. All patients were treated with primary surgery followed by platinum-based chemotherapy Outcomes were assessed by means of clinical examination and imaging tests. Patients with complete response were followed up in the outpatient office. Secondary chemotherapy was administered if persistent or progressive disease was diagnosed.
In the analyzed group of 66 (100%) patients, the following mutations of BRCA1 gene were found: in 31 (47%) - C61G (exon 5), in 21 (31,8%) - 5382insC (exon 20), in 6 (9.1%) - 185delAG and in 8 (12.1%) - other (exon 11). Mean patient age was 48. FIGO stage I and stage II were diagnosed in 7 (10,6%), stage III in 58 (89,9%) and stage IV in 1 patient (1,5%). Twenty five (37.9%) patients underwent complete macroscopic primary cytoreduction. Platinum-based chemotherapy was administered to all 66 patients after surgery Complete response (CR), partial response (PR) and progressive disease (PD) was achieved in 31 (46.9%), 30 (45,5%) and 5 (7.6%) patients, respectively Secondary surgery was performed in 29 (43.9%) of patients after completion of adjuvant therapy Second-line chemotherapy was administered in 40 (60.6%) patients due to residual or progressive disease. Mean time of follow-up was 65 months. Forty one (62. 1%) patients died due to OC progression.
Clinical features and disease courses in BRCA1-dependent OC patients in the analyzed group were similar to other results reported in the literature.
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.