Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Versus Primary Debulking Surgery in FIGO Stage III and IV Epithelial Ovarian, Tubal or Peritoneal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

IF 3.1 Q2 ONCOLOGY Oncology Reviews Pub Date : 2022-09-27 eCollection Date: 2022-01-01 DOI:10.3389/or.2022.10605
Alexander A Tzanis, Christos Iavazzo, Alexandros Hadjivasilis, Hara Tsouvali, George Α Antoniou, Stavros A Antoniou
{"title":"Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Versus Primary Debulking Surgery in FIGO Stage III and IV Epithelial Ovarian, Tubal or Peritoneal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Alexander A Tzanis,&nbsp;Christos Iavazzo,&nbsp;Alexandros Hadjivasilis,&nbsp;Hara Tsouvali,&nbsp;George Α Antoniou,&nbsp;Stavros A Antoniou","doi":"10.3389/or.2022.10605","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Objective:</b> To investigate whether neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) confers superior outcomes compared to primary debulking surgery (PDS) in patients with stage III and IV epithelial ovarian, tubal or peritoneal cancer as well as in patients with high tumour load. <b>Methods:</b> We searched the electronic databases PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled trials, and Scopus from inception to March 2021. We considered randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing NACT with PDS for women with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) stages III and IV. The primary outcomes were overall survival and progression-free survival. Secondary outcomes were optimal cytoreduction rates, peri-operative adverse events, and quality of life. <b>Results:</b> Six RCTs with a total of 1901 participants were included. Meta-analysis demonstrated similar overall survival (HR = 0.96, 95% CI [0.86-1.07]) and progression-free survival (HR = 0.98, 95% CI [0.89-1.08]) between NACT and PDS. Subgroup analyses did not demonstrate higher survival for stage IV patients (HR = 0.88, 95% CI [0.71-1.09]) nor for patients with metastatic lesions >5 cm (HR = 0.86, 95% CI [0.69-1.08]) treated with NACT, albeit with some uncertainty due to imprecision. Similarly, no survival benefit was observed in the subgroup of patients with metastatic lesions >10 cm (HR = 0.94, 95% CI [0.78-1.12]). NACT was associated with significantly higher rates of complete cytoreduction (RR = 2.34, 95% CI [1.48-3.71]). Severe peri-operative adverse events were less frequent in the NACT arm (RR = 0.34, 95% CI [0.16-0.72]. <b>Conclusion:</b> Patients with stage III and IV epithelial ovarian cancer undergoing NACT or PDS have similar overall survival. NACT is likely associated with higher rates of complete cytoreduction and lower risk of severe adverse events and peri-operative death.</p>","PeriodicalId":19487,"journal":{"name":"Oncology Reviews","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9756845/pdf/","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Oncology Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/or.2022.10605","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Objective: To investigate whether neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) confers superior outcomes compared to primary debulking surgery (PDS) in patients with stage III and IV epithelial ovarian, tubal or peritoneal cancer as well as in patients with high tumour load. Methods: We searched the electronic databases PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled trials, and Scopus from inception to March 2021. We considered randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing NACT with PDS for women with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) stages III and IV. The primary outcomes were overall survival and progression-free survival. Secondary outcomes were optimal cytoreduction rates, peri-operative adverse events, and quality of life. Results: Six RCTs with a total of 1901 participants were included. Meta-analysis demonstrated similar overall survival (HR = 0.96, 95% CI [0.86-1.07]) and progression-free survival (HR = 0.98, 95% CI [0.89-1.08]) between NACT and PDS. Subgroup analyses did not demonstrate higher survival for stage IV patients (HR = 0.88, 95% CI [0.71-1.09]) nor for patients with metastatic lesions >5 cm (HR = 0.86, 95% CI [0.69-1.08]) treated with NACT, albeit with some uncertainty due to imprecision. Similarly, no survival benefit was observed in the subgroup of patients with metastatic lesions >10 cm (HR = 0.94, 95% CI [0.78-1.12]). NACT was associated with significantly higher rates of complete cytoreduction (RR = 2.34, 95% CI [1.48-3.71]). Severe peri-operative adverse events were less frequent in the NACT arm (RR = 0.34, 95% CI [0.16-0.72]. Conclusion: Patients with stage III and IV epithelial ovarian cancer undergoing NACT or PDS have similar overall survival. NACT is likely associated with higher rates of complete cytoreduction and lower risk of severe adverse events and peri-operative death.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
FIGO III期和IV期上皮性卵巢癌、输卵管癌或腹膜癌的新辅助化疗与原发性减体积手术:系统回顾和荟萃分析
目的:研究与初次减瘤手术(PDS)相比,新辅助化疗(NACT)在癌症、输卵管癌或腹膜癌III期和IV期患者以及高肿瘤负荷患者中是否具有优越的疗效。方法:从开始到2021年3月,我们搜索了电子数据库PubMed、Cochrane对照试验中央登记册和Scopus。我们考虑了对上皮性卵巢癌症(EOC)III期和IV期妇女进行NACT和PDS比较的随机对照试验(RCT)。主要结果是总生存率和无进展生存率。次要结果是最佳细胞减少率、围手术期不良事件和生活质量。结果:纳入6项随机对照试验,共1901名参与者。荟萃分析显示,NACT和PDS之间的总生存率(HR=0.96,95%CI[0.86-1.07])和无进展生存率(HR=0.98,95%CI[0.89-1.08])相似。亚组分析没有显示接受NACT治疗的IV期患者(HR=0.88,95%CI[0.711-1.09])和转移性病变>5cm(HR=0.86,95%CI[0.69-1.08])的生存率更高,尽管由于不精确性存在一些不确定性。类似地,在转移性病变>10cm的患者亚组中没有观察到生存益处(HR=0.94,95%CI[0.78-1.12])。NACT与显著更高的完全细胞减少率相关(RR=2.34,95%CI[1.48-3.71])。NACT组严重的围手术期不良事件发生率较低(RR=0.34,95%CI[0.16-0.72]结论:接受NACT或PDS治疗的癌症III期和IV期患者的总生存率相似。NACT可能与更高的完全细胞减少率和更低的严重不良事件和围手术期死亡风险有关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Oncology Reviews
Oncology Reviews ONCOLOGY-
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
审稿时长
9 weeks
期刊介绍: Oncology Reviews is a quarterly peer-reviewed, international journal that publishes authoritative state-of-the-art reviews on preclinical and clinical aspects of oncology. The journal will provide up-to-date information on the latest achievements in different fields of oncology for both practising clinicians and basic researchers. Oncology Reviews aims at being international in scope and readership, as reflected also by its Editorial Board, gathering the world leading experts in both pre-clinical research and everyday clinical practice. The journal is open for publication of supplements, monothematic issues and for publishing abstracts of scientific meetings; conditions can be obtained from the Editor-in-Chief or the publisher.
期刊最新文献
Tumor therapeutics in the era of "RECIST": past, current insights, and future prospects. Colorectal cancer and associated genetic, lifestyle, cigarette, nargileh-hookah use and alcohol consumption risk factors: a comprehensive case-control study. Environment and gynaecologic cancers. Tracheal Tumors: Clinical Practice Guidelines for Palliative Treatment and Follow-Up. Barriers and Facilitators Related to Undertaking Physical Activities in Colorectal Cancer Patients: A Scoping Review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1