HealthNewsReview.org - Can Ecstasy help ease post-traumatic stress?

Cochrane Collaboration review: Cytoreductive surgery plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone for recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer

Plain language summary

Secondary surgical efforts to remove recurrent ovarian cancer in women who are no longer in remission
Ovarian cancer is the sixth most common cancer among women. Epithelial ovarian cancer is a disease in which malignant cells form in the tissue covering the ovary. It accounts for about 90% of ovarian cancers., the remaining 10% arise from germ cells and the sex cord and stroma of the ovary. Women with epithelial ovarian cancer that has returned after primary surgery (recurrent disease) may need secondary surgery to remove all or part of the cancer. The option of surgery (debulking or cytoreductive surgery) is currently offered to a select group of women with recurrent ovarian cancer. It is important to ascertain whether this surgery helps women with recurrent disease to survive for longer than if they only got chemotherapy.

We searched for studies that compared secondary cytoreductive surgery and chemotherapy with chemotherapy alone in women with recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer. Although we checked 1431 possible articles, we found no relevant studies. Therefore there is currently no evidence to determine if secondary cytoreductive surgery is better or worse than chemotherapy alone in terms of prolonging life.

The review highlights the need for good quality studies comparing secondary cytoreductive surgery to chemotherapy.

Diagnosis of Ovarian Carcinoma Cell Type is Highly Reproducible: A Transcanadian Study

Abstract:
Reproducible diagnosis of ovarian carcinoma cell types is critical for cell type-specific treatment. The purpose of this study was to test the reproducibility of cell type diagnosis across Canada. Analysis of the interobserver reproducibility of histologic tumor type was performed among 6 pathologists after brief training in the use of modified World Health Organization criteria to classify ovarian carcinomas into 1 of 6 categories: high-grade serous, endometrioid, clear cell, mucinous, low-grade serous, and other. These 6 pathologists independently reviewed a test set of 40 ovarian carcinomas. A validation set of 88 consecutive ovarian carcinomas drawn from 5 centers was subject to local review by 1 of the 6 study pathologists, and central review by a single observer. Interobserver agreement was assessed through calculation of concordance and kappa values for pair-wise comparison. For the test set, the paired concordance between pathologists in cell type diagnosis ranged from 85.0% to 97.5% (average 92.3%), and the kappa values were 0.80 to 0.97 (average 0.89). Inclusion of immunostaining results did not significantly improve reproducibility (P=0.69). For the validation set, the concordance between original diagnosis and local review was 84% and between local review and central review was 94%. The kappa values were 0.73 and 0.89, respectively. With a brief training exercise and the use of defined criteria for ovarian carcinoma subtyping, there is excellent interobserver reproducibility in diagnosis of cell type. This has implications for clinical trials of subtype-specific ovarian carcinoma treatments.