Does maximal effort cytoreductive surgery after 6-cycles of chemotherapy play a role in the management of advanced ovarian cancer?

Abstract

Background: The current gold standard in the surgical management of advanced ovarian cancer recommended by ESGO and ASCO is complete resection of all visible disease. If this is not deemed possible in the upfront setting, then interval cytoreductive surgery should be undertaken after 3-4-cycles of neo-adjuvant chemotherapy. Occasionally, surgery in the interval setting may not be possible either due to factors associated with patient fitness, or due to persistence of disease in sites deemed unresectable on interval scanning. Limited published data assessing outcomes from surgery delayed to after 6-cycles of NACT (delayed cytoreductive surgery) suggests a potential benefit over no surgery and suggests that if interval cytoreductive surgery is not possible, then the clinician might consider delayed surgery on a case by case basis. We sought to review the outcomes of patients with Advanced Ovarian Cancer presenting to the Northern Gynaecological Oncology Centre who underwent delayed surgery.

Methodology: This study is a retrospective analysis looking at patients with epithelial ovarian cancer of FIGO stage IIIC and above, who were not deemed suitable to undergo either primary or interval cytoreductive surgery, referred to the Northern Gynaecological Oncology Centre Gateshead, UK, between January 2014 and December 2020. We compared survival outcomes in women receiving non-standard treatment for advanced ovarian cancer, comparing two groups of patients; those completing at least six cycles of platinum-based chemotherapy as part of their first-line treatment and not having surgery with those who received delayed cytoreductive surgery after completing of 6-cycles of primary chemotherapy.

Results: A total of 89 cases were included in the analysis and 78/89 patients had completed at least 6-cycles of primary chemotherapy in the first-line treatment setting without any attempt at surgical cytoreduction. 11/89 patients underwent DDS after completion of 6-cycles of primary chemotherapy. The majority of included cases 87/89 (98%) were high-grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSOC). Surgery and no-surgery groups were well matched in terms of stage comparison at presentation with an overall stage distribution of 62% FIGO stage IIIC, 10% stage IVA and 28% stage IVB. The surgery group were significantly younger than the no-surgery group with median age of 68 (interquartile range (IQR) 59-71 years) and 77 years (IQR 70-82 years) (p < 0.01), respectively. The overall survival (OS) of the surgery and no-surgery groups was 25 months and 23 months, respectively (p = 0.38) with a median follow-up of 20 months (IQR 11-29 months). The 1 year disease-specific mortality for both groups was 18%.

Conclusion: Maximal effort cytoreductive surgery after 6-cycles is not associated with a survival benefit (even with complete cytoreduction) but may be considered in the context of symptomatic disease or for palliation of symptoms amenable to surgery.