Objectives This article aimed to study the role of adjuvant intraperitoneal (IP) chemotherapy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and optimal interval surgical debulking.
Method All patients with epithelial ovarian cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy were retrospectively reviewed from 2007 to 2009. Demographics, related diseases, and survival outcome data were abstracted from the medical records. χ2 statistics were applied to categorical variables. Cox regression was used to model progression-free survival (PFS), adjusting for age, residual status, and use of adjuvant IP chemotherapy. All P values less than 0.05 were considered statistically significant.
Results Sixty-five patients were reviewed. The median age was 63.3 years. The majority had stage III disease with serous histology. Optimal residual (<1 cm) after interval debulking was achieved in 34 (54%) of 63 patients. Sixteen patients chose to receive adjuvant IP chemotherapy. The median follow-up was 26.2 months. Fifty-one patients had progressed, with a median PFS of 17.5 months. Adjuvant IP chemotherapy was not predictive of PFS (hazard ratio, 0.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.24–3.44; P = 0.89). The estimated median overall survival was 37.8 months (95% CI, 29.9–45.7) in the intravenous group versus 48.1 months (95% CI, 37.9–58.3) in the IP-treated patients (P = 0.162).
Conclusions Adjuvant IP chemotherapy was not predictive of survival after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in our small exploratory study. The role of IP chemotherapy in this setting needs to be further studied in a larger prospective patient cohort.
- Intraperitoneal chemotherapy
- Interval debulking
- Neoadjuvant chemotherapy
Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
The research project was funded by an educational research grant from Roche Pharmaceuticals.
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.