Explore the vast range of titles available.

BackgroundPrimary cytoreductive surgery followed by chemotherapy has been considered standard management for patients with advanced ovarian cancer over decades. An alternative approach of interval debulking surgery following neoadjuvant chemotherapy was subsequently reported by two randomized phase III trials (EORTC‐GCG, CHORUS), which were criticized owing to important limitations, especially regarding the rate of complete resection.Primary ObjectiveTo clarify the optimal timing of surgical therapy in advanced ovarian cancer.Study HypothesisPrimary cytoreductive surgery is superior to interval cytoreductive surgery following neoadjuvant chemotherapy for overall survival in patients with advanced ovarian cancer.Trial DesignTRUST is an international open, randomized, controlled multi-center trial investigating overall survival after primary cytoreductive surgery versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy and subsequent interval cytoreductive surgery in patients with FIGO stage IIIB–IVB ovarian, tubal, and peritoneal carcinoma. To guarantee adequate surgical quality, participating centers need to fulfill specific quality assurance criteria (eg, ≥50% complete resection rate in upfront surgery for FIGO IIIB–IVB patients, ≥36 debulking-surgeries/year) and agree to independent audits by TRUST quality committee delegates. Patients in the primary cytoreductive surgery arm undergo surgery followed by 6 cycles of platinum-based chemotherapy, whereas patients in the interval cytoreductive surgery arm undergo 3 cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy after histologic confirmation of the disease, followed by interval cytoreductive surgery and subsequently, 3 cycles of platinum-based chemotherapy. The intention of surgery for both groups is complete tumor resection according to guideline recommendations.Major Inclusion/Exclusion CriteriaMajor inclusion criteria are suspected or histologically confirmed, newly diagnosed invasive epithelial ovarian cancer, fallopian tube carcinoma, or primary peritoneal carcinoma FIGO stage IIIB–IVB (IV only if resectable metastasis). Major exclusion criteria are non-epithelial ovarian malignancies and borderline tumors; prior chemotherapy for ovarian cancer; or abdominal/pelvic radiotherapy.Primary EndpointOverall survival.Sample Size772 patients.Estimated Dates for Completing Accrual and Presenting ResultsAccrual completion approximately mid-2019, results are expected after 5 years' follow-up in 2024.Trial Registration NCT02828618.

Objective: To identify the best method among the radiologic, laparoscopic and laparotomic scoring assessment to predict the outcomes of cytoreductive surgery in patients with advanced ovarian cancer (AOC). Methods: Patients with AOC who underwent pre-operative computed tomography (CT) scan, laparoscopic evaluation, and cytoreductive surgery between August 2016 and February 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. Predictive Index (PI) score and Peritoneal Cancer Index (PCI) scores were used to estimate the tumor load and predict the residual disease in the primary debulking surgery (PDS) and interval debulking surgery (IDS) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) groups. Concordance percentages were calculated between the two scores. Results: Among 100 eligible patients, 69 underwent PDS, and 31 underwent NACT and IDS. Complete cytoreduction was achieved in 72.5% of patients in the PDS group and 77.4% in the IDS. In patients undergoing PDS, the laparoscopic PI and the laparotomic PCI had the best accuracies for complete cytoreduction (R0) [area under the curve (AUC) = 0.78 and AUC = 0.83, respectively]. In the IDS group, the laparotomic PI (AUC = 0.75) and the laparoscopic PCI (AUC= 0.87) were associated with the best accuracy in R0 prediction. Furthermore, radiological assessment, through PI and PCI, was associated with the worst accuracy in either PDS or IDS group (PI in PDS: AUC = 0.64; PCI in PDS: AUC = 0.64; PI in IDS: AUC = 0.46; PCI in IDS: AUC = 0.47). Conclusion: The laparoscopic score assessment had high accuracy for optimal cytoreduction in AOC patients undergoing PDS or IDS. Integrating diagnostic laparoscopy in the decision-making algorithm to accurately triage AOC patients to different treatment strategies seems necessary.

Amanda Jessie Maharani, Undergraduate Medical Education Program, Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Padjadjaran, Bandung, West Java, Indonesia, Email amanda22002@mail.unpad.ac.idPurpose: This study evaluates the role of robotic-interval debulking surgery (robotic IDS) compared to traditional laparotomy as the game-changer in surgical outcome and complications for ovarian cancer patients.Patients and Methods: Following PRISMA guidelines, relevant literature published between 2014 and 2024 was retrieved from PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar, EBSCOHost, and SAGE Journals. Out of 816 studies, four were included, assessed for bias using ROBINS-I and analyzed with random-effects meta-analysis with RevMan 5.4.Results: A total of four studies involving 166 patients were analyzed. The findings indicate that robotic IDS has a significant result on achieving complete cytoreduction (OR of 6.67 [p = 0.0003]), reducing estimated blood loss (SMD of − 0.71 [p = 0.02]), and shorter hospital stay (SMD of − 1.58 [p< 0.00001]). The result also shows promising effects on intraoperative complications with an OR of 0.82 [p=0.86] and postoperative complications with an OR of 0.40 [p=0.11]. Conversely, there is a longer operative time in robotic IDS compared to laparotomy with a SMD of 0.40 [p = 0.26].Conclusion: Robotic IDS advances surgical management of advanced-stage (stage III–IV) and recurrent ovarian cancer, offering improved cytoreduction rates, reduced blood loss, and shorter hospital stays. A promising effect was also observed on intraoperative and postoperative complications, although operative time was longer. Further research is needed to demonstrate clearer clinical advantages.

Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) has been widely investigated in patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis, including those with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC), with conflicting results. The hyperthermia enhances drug tissue penetration, synergizes with several cytotoxic drugs including cisplatin, degrades BRCA2, suppresses homologous recombination, and elicits an anticancer immune response. A meta-analysis of retrospective studies including both patients with primary advanced EOC and those with recurrent platinum-sensitive EOC failed to detect a benefit in terms of progression-free survival (PFS) or overall survival (OS) from the addition of HIPEC after surgery. The aim of the present review was to analyze the recent randomized clinical trials designed to assess the value of HIPEC in the management of patients with primary advanced EOC. Although not free from criticism and bias, the available data from two phase III trials seem to suggest that the addition of HIPEC to interval debulking surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy significantly improves PFS and OS. Conversely, HIPEC does not appear to offer any advantage after primary debulking surgery. Several phase III trials are currently ongoing on these issues and the use of HIPEC is still a matter of debate in the scientific community. Additional translational research is strongly warranted to detect biological variables able to identify a subset of patients who may have a major benefit from this therapeutic approach. In particular, the clinical outcome of patients who undergo HIPEC should be correlated with BRCA status and homologous recombination repair status.

Although standard chemotherapy for three to four cycles followed by surgery is considered safe and effective in the management of advanced ovarian cancer, the impact of extending treatment beyond this period remains uncertain. Some authors suggest that the number of neoadjuvant chemotherapy cycles does not directly affect prognosis and may reflect a confounding bias. Others, however, indicate that a prolonged exposure to chemotherapy can promote the selection of resistant tumor clones, negatively influencing patient survival and disease progression. This review aims to summarize the current evidence on the topic, evaluating the effect of prolonged chemotherapy on surgical cytoreduction and survival. To achieve this, we conducted an analysis of the English-language literature available in PubMed, focusing on treatment duration, achievement of complete surgical resection, survival outcomes, and prognostic factors.

This study aimed to identify differences in the pattern and timing of recurrence in patients with advanced ovarian cancer undergoing primary (PDS) or interval debulking surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT). Data were prospectively collected on 105 patients from June 2016 to March 2020. There were 30 (50%) recurrences in the PDS group compared to 32 (72.7%) in the NACT group (p=0.020). An intra-abdominal relapse was more common in NACT compared to PDS patients (64.4% vs. 38.3%, p=0.008) and a recurrence in two or more sites (NACT: 44.4% vs. PDS: 23.3%, p=0.010). Among completely cytoreduced patients, a pelvic recurrence was more frequent in NACT patients (NACT: 50% vs. 22.4% in PDS, p=0.011). Progression-free survival (PFS) was longer in PDS compared to NACT (27 vs. 16 months, p=0.039). NACT patients experienced an unfavorable distribution and timing of recurrent disease compared to patient who underwent PDS.

Background/Aim: We aimed to identify differences in cytoreduction rates and procedures performed in patients with advanced ovarian cancer undergoing primary (PDS) or interval debulking surgery (IDS). Patients and Methods: Data were collected prospectively on 110 consecutive patients from June 2016 to Mar 2020. Results: Forty-nine patients (44.5%) underwent diaphragmatic peritonectomy (34 in PDS and 15 in IDS, p=0.005), while 38 (34.5%) underwent large bowel resection (29 in PDS and 9 in IDS, p<0.001). Complete cytoreduction was achieved in 39 patients in PDS and 29 in IDS (65% vs. 58%, p=0.22). Longer operations with more blood loss and extended hospital stay were performed in the PDS group. Ten patients (9.1%) experienced severe complications and in eight patients (7.2%) chemotherapy was delayed. Conclusion: More bowel resections and diaphragmatic stripping were performed in the PDS group. End surgical results were similar between groups, with a trend for more complete cytoreduction in PDS.

Given the rising use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) followed by interval debulking surgery (IDS) in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC), we sought to assess practice trends in overall survival (OS), complete gross resection (R0), and postoperative mortality following debulking surgery. The National Cancer Database (NCDB) was used to identify 34,982 stage IIIC and IV EOC patients between 2010 and 2017 who underwent surgery. Annual proportions of patients receiving IDS and PDS were calculated. Median OS was estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method. Joinpoint models were fitted to evaluate surgical trends. Statistics were performed using SPSS and Joinpoint. Of 34,982 patients, 10,460 (29.9%) underwent IDS. IDS patients were older, more likely to have stage IV disease, and more likely to be non-White. Median OS was higher in the PDS group (54 vs. 38.8 months, p < 0.001). Postoperative 90-day mortality was lower in the PDS group (1.7% vs. 2.4%, p < 0.001), though IDS patients had a lower 30-day readmission rate (6.2% vs. 3.1%, p < 0.001). IDS patients were less likely to undergo extensive surgery (27.4% vs. 36.7%, p < 0.001) and more likely to achieve R0 resection (42% vs. 38.6%, p < 0.001). The IDS rate increased from 18.9% to 40.6% (annual percentage change (APC): 11.8%, p < 0.05) from 2010 to 2017. Median OS improved from 46.6 to 51 months (APC: 1.9%, p < 0.05), driven by the PDS cohort. The R0 resection rate rose from 34.8 to 41% (APC: 2.65%, p < 0.01), driven by the PDS cohort (APC: 2.83%, p < 0.01). Postoperative 90-day mortality decreased from 2.4% to 1.5% (APC: −4.64%, p < 0.05), due to a reduction in PDS patients (APC: −6.83%, p < 0.05). There was no change in the rate of extensive surgery over time. In conclusion, from 2010 to 2017, increased triage of patients to NACT was accompanied by a higher R0 resection rate and reduced postoperative mortality in PDS patients, with no observed detriment to OS. This data suggests improvement in case selection between IDS and PDS.

Background The aim of the study was to analyze the overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS) of patients with high grade and advanced stage epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) with at least 60 months of follow-up treated in a single gynecologic oncology institute. We compared primary debulking surgery (PDS) versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus interval debulking surgery (NACT + IDS) stratifying data based on residual disease with the intent to identify the rationale for therapeutic option decision and the role of laparoscopic evaluation of resectability for that intention. Patients and methods This is observational retrospective study on consecutive patients with diagnosis of high grade and International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage III/IV EOC referred to our center between January 2008 and May 2012. We selected only patients with a follow-up of at least 60 months. Primary endpoint was to compare PDS versus NACT + IDS in term of progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints were PFS and OS stratifying data according to residual disease after surgery in patients receiving PDS versus NACT + IDS. Finally, through Cox hazards models, we tested the prognostic value of different variables (patient age at diagnosis, residual disease after debulking, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) stage, number of adjuvant-chemotherapy cycles) for predicting OS. Results A total number of 157 patients were included in data analysis. Comparing PDS arm (108 patients) and NACT + IDS arm (49 patients) we found no significant differences in term of OS (41.3 versus 34.5 months, respectively) and PFS (17.3 versus 18.3 months, respectively). According to residual disease we found no significant differences in term of OS between NACT + IDS patients with residual disease = 0 and PDS patients with residual disease = 0 or residual disease = 1, as well as no significant differences in PFS were found comparing NACT + IDS patients with residual disease = 0 and PDS patients with residual disease = 0; contrarily, median PFS resulted significantly lower in PDS patients receiving optimal debulking (residual disease = 1) in comparison to NACT + IDS patients receiving complete debulking (residual disease = 0). PDS arm was affected by a significant higher rate of severe post-operative complications (grade 3 and 4). Diagnostic laparoscopy before surgery was significantly associated with complete debulking. Conclusions We confirm previous findings concerning the non-superiority of NACT + IDS compared to PDS for the treatment of EOC, even if NACT + IDS treatment was associated with significant lower rate of post-operative complications. On the other hand, selecting patients for NACT + IDS, based on laparoscopic evaluation of resectabilty prolongs the PFS and does not worse the OS compared to the patients not completely debulked with PDS.

Objective. To compare the survival outcomes of primary debulking surgery and platinum-based adjuvant chemotherapy versus interval debulking surgery after platinum-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with stage IVb endometrial cancer and peritoneal carcinosis. Methods. The online search included the following data sources: PubMed, Scopus, WOS, and the Cochrane Library from 1990 to 2024 (PROSPERO registration code: CRD42023438602). A total of 3230 studies were identified, with the inclusion of 16. Individual patient data on survival outcomes, disease distribution, and residual tumors, as well as details of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and adjuvant treatment, were extracted. Results. A total of 285 patients were included: 197 (69%) underwent primary debulking surgery and 88 (31%) underwent interval debulking surgery. The pooled analysis revealed a median progression-free survival in the primary debulking surgery group of 18.0 months compared to 12.0 months in the interval debulking surgery group (p = 0.028; log-rank test), and a median overall survival of 30.92 months versus 28.73 months (p = 0.400; log-rank test). Among the 134 patients with available information on the residual tumor after primary debulking surgery or interval debulking surgery, 110 (82%) had no macroscopic residual tumor (residual tumor = 0). The median progression-free survival was 18.9 months in the residual tumor = 0 group compared to 6.19 months in the residual tumor > 0 group (p < 0.001; log-rank test); the median overall survival was 40.6 months versus 21 months (p = 0.028; log-rank test). Conclusions. These results indicate that primary debulking surgery should be considered the preferred treatment approach for advanced endometrial cancer with carcinosis, especially in carefully selected patients where complete cytoreduction is achievable. Further prospective studies are warranted to confirm these results and to establish standardized criteria for patient selection, incorporating molecular-integrated risk profiles for endometrial cancer.