Objective: To evaluate and compare overall survival and progression-free survival in two groups of patients with advanced ovarian cancer, managed by neoadjuvant chemotherapy (3 cycles or more) followed by interval debulking surgery. Secondary objectives regarded surgical morbidity and extent of cytoreduction.
Material and methods: We conducted a retrospective study, in a referral center, evaluating the management of patients diagnosed with advanced ovarian cancer (FIGO IIIC-IV) beneficiating of interval surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. We compared two groups, one in which patients underwent 3 cycles of chemotherapy before surgery, and a second group in which patients underwent more than 3 cycles.
Results: 140 patients underwent interval surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Among these patients, 45 patients underwent 3 or less cycles (group 1) and 95 patients more than 3 cycles (group 2). There was no statistical difference for overall and progression free survival. The mean overall survival was 58,4 months for group 1 and 58,3 for group 2 (p.value = 0.56). The mean progression free survival was 30,5 months for group 1 and 23,8 months for group 2 (p.value = 0.17). More posterior pelvectomies were realized in group 1 compared to group 2 with a statistically significant difference (p=0,01). There was no difference regarding complete macroscopic difference during the surgery between the 2 groups (p=0,09).
Conclusion: Debulking surgery is an invasive and heavy procedure and is not always possible in first line. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by interval debulking surgery is an accepted alternative. The number of administered cycles is questionable, and does not seem to have a significant impact on overall survival and progression free survival. However, surgical morbidity is significantly reduced by increased cycles of chemotherapy.
Keywords: Debulking surgery; Neoadjuvant chemotherapy; Ovarian Cancer.
Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.