Sehouli J.,Campus Virchow Clinic University Hospital
International journal of gynecological cancer : official journal of the International Gynecological Cancer Society | Year: 2010
To evaluate the difference in operative and clinical outcome for patients with primary advanced ovarian cancer (AOC) after optimal primary debulking surgery (PDS) versus interval debulking surgery (IDS). Tumor dissemination pattern and surgical outcome, as defined by morbidity, progression-free (PFS) survival and overall survival (OS) were systematically analyzed in AOC patients who underwent surgery in our institution between September 2000 and August 2009. Overall survival and PFS were calculated by Kaplan-Meier curves. Univariate and Cox regression analysis were performed to identify the impact of IDS on surgical outcome and survival. Overall, 372 consecutive patients with histologically proven AOC (FIGO [International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics] stage III/IV) were evaluated. Forty patients (10.8%) underwent IDS after a median of 5 cycles (range, 2-6 cycles) platinum- and taxane-based chemotherapy, and 332 patients (89.2%) underwent PDS. Patients who underwent IDS had a significantly lower rate of tumor involvement of the lower (78.9% vs 98.8%; P < 0.001) and middle abdomen (68.4% vs 83.1%; P = 0.044) compared with PDS patients. During IDS, a significantly higher probability for complete tumor resection occurred when compared with PDS (85% vs 58.7%; P = 0.02) by equivalent rates of operative complications (36.4% vs 36.5%; P = 1.00). However, mean PFS was significantly reduced in IDS patients (14.6 vs 33.2 months; P < 0.001). Mean OS was also higher in PDS patients, but this reached a statistical significance only when complete tumor resection was obtained (65.4 vs 37.9 months; P = 0.005). Multivariate analysis identified that IDS was associated with an unfavorable OS and PFS. : It seems that PDS has a more favorable outcome than IDS on both OS and PFS in AOC patients, even though IDS leads to significantly higher rates of complete tumor resection. Source
Fotopoulou C.,Universitatsklinik Charite |
Fotopoulou C.,Imperial College London |
Kraetschell R.,Universitatsklinik Charite |
Dowdy S.,Rochester College |
And 13 more authors.
Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics | Year: 2015
Purpose: To ascertain the spectrum of clinical management of endometrial carcinoma (EC) the largest international survey was conducted to evaluate and identify differences worldwide. Methods: After validation of a 15-item questionnaire regarding surgical and adjuvant treatment of EC in Germany, an English-adapted questionnaire was put online and posted to all the major gynecological cancer Societies worldwide for further distribution commencing in 2010 and continued for 26 months. Results: A total of 618 Institutions around the world participated: Central Europe (CE), Southern Europe (SE), Northern Europe (NE), Asia and USA/Canada/UK. Both a therapeutic and staging value was attributed to systematic pelvic and paraaortic lymph node dissection (LND) in CE (74.6 %) and in Asia (67.2 %), as opposed to USA/UK where LND was mainly for staging purposes (53.5 %; p < 0.001). LND was performed up to the renal veins in CE in 86.8 %, in Asia in 80.8 %, in USA/UK in 51.2 % and in SE in 45.1 % (p < 0.001) of cases. In advanced disease, centers from Asia were treated most with adjuvant chemotherapy alone (93.6 %), as opposed to centers in SE, CE and UK/USA that employed combination chemo-radiotherapy in 90.9 % (p < 0.001) of cases. Paclitaxel/carboplatin was mostly used followed by doxorubicin/cisplatin (75 vs. 23.3 %; p < 0.001). In total, 94 % of all participants supported the concept of treating EC patients within appropriate clinical trials. Conclusions: There is broad range in both the surgical and adjuvant treatment of EC across different countries. Large-scale multicenter prospective trials are warranted to establish consistent, evidence-based guidelines to optimize treatment worldwide. © 2014, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg. Source
Heitz F.,Evangelische Huyssens Stiftung Knappschaft GmbH |
Amant F.,Catholic University of Leuven |
Fotopoulou C.,Campus Virchow Clinic University Hospital |
Battista M.J.,Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz |
And 11 more authors.
International Journal of Gynecological Cancer | Year: 2014
Objectives: This study aimed to compare the prognosis of patients with synchronous endometrial and ovarian cancer (SEOC) to matched controls with either endometrial cancer (EC) or ovarian cancer (OC). Methods: A retrospective case-control study including all patients with SEOC who had been treated at 5 European tertiary gynecologic oncology centers between 1996 and 2011 and patients with either EC or OC matched for age, International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage, histology, year of diagnosis, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance score. Results: The study cohort comprised 77, 132, and 126 patients with SEOC, EC, and OC, respectively. The patient characteristics confirmed an equal distribution of matching factors, and the median follow-up did not differ (P = 0.44). 48.1% of the patients with SEOC showed early FIGO stage I for both EC and OC. The 5-year PFS rates differed between SEOC and EC (76.3% vs 86.3%; P = 0.047) but not the 5-year overall survival rates (71.6% vs 79.8%; P = 0.12) and did not differ between SEOC and OC (76.3% vs 63.8%; P = 0.19 and 71.6% vs 69.3%; P = 0.61, respectively). After the adjustment for the FIGO stage of the 2 components of SEOC, neither PFS nor overall survival rates were different. Conclusions: Prognosis of patients with SEOC tended to be the same in comparison with matched controls with either one EC or OC. Therefore, it could be considered that patients with SEOC may be eligible for clinical trials of the advanced tumor component if no additional therapy is indicated for the other component. © 2013 by IGCS and ESGO. Source
Braicu E.-I.,Campus Virchow Clinic University Hospital |
Sehouli J.,Campus Virchow Clinic University Hospital |
Richter R.,Campus Virchow Clinic University Hospital |
Pietzner K.,Campus Virchow Clinic University Hospital |
And 2 more authors.
European Journal of Cancer | Year: 2012
Objective: Recurrence rates of Epithelial Ovarian Cancer (EOC) remain high. Aim of the present study was to compare tumour pattern and surgical outcome at primary and secondary tumourdebulking in a paired patients' collective. Methods: Seventy-nine consecutive EOC-patients who underwent both primary and secondary cytoreduction in our institution between 09/2000 and 12/2010 were evaluated according to a validated documentation-tool ('IMO', Intraoperative Mapping Ovarian Cancer). Differences in tumour-pattern between paired samples were examined using McNemar-test or sign-test. Results: A complete macroscopic tumour resection could be achieved significantly more often during primary versus secondary surgery (77% versus 50%; p < 0.001) in comparable operative times (242 min versus 199 min; p = 0.15) and by equivalent operative morbidity (25% versus 29%; p = 0.424). Tumour-residuals at primary correlated significantly with tumour-residuals at secondary cytoreduction (p = 0.003). Patients at relapse had significantly higher rates of tumour involvement of the gastric serosa (2.5% versus 16.9%; p = 0.001), serosa of small intestine (20.3% versus 44.9%; p < 0.001) and mesentery (30.4% versus 50%; p = 0.012). The relative-risk for peritoneal carcinosis, intestinal tumour involvement or positive lymph nodes at secondary tumourdebulking in the case of presence of these features at primary surgery was 1.53 (95% CI: 0.89-2.63); 0.92 (95% CI: 0.65-1.31) and 1.49 (95% CI: 0.83-2.68), respectively, and thus not reaching a statistical significance. Conclusions: Secondary cytoreduction due to EOC appears to be associated with significantly lower optimal tumourdebulking rates compared to primary setting, since the disease tends to recur in patterns less accessible to complete resection such as gastrointestinal serosa, mesentery and upper abdomen. By maximal surgical effort, tumour residuals significantly correlate between primary and secondary cytoreduction. No other predictors of surgical outcome or tumour-pattern could be identified. © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Source