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.
0 comments :
Post a Comment
Your comments?
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.