Definitions based on a 50% or 75% decrease of CA 125 levels have been shown reliably to define partial response of ovarian cancer in patients receiving first-line chemotherapy. These definitions should be used in addition to or instead of standard response criteria.

Summary The purpose of this systematic study was to provide an up to date and reliable quantitative summary of the relative benefits of various types of chemotherapy (non-platinum vs platinum, single-agent vs combination and carboplatin vs cisplatin) in the treatment of advanced ovarian cancer. Also, to investigate whether well-defined patient subgroups benefit more or less from cisplatin-or carboplatinbased therapy. Meta-analyses were based on updated individual patient data from all available randomized controlled trials (published and unpublished), including 37 trials, 5667 patients and 4664 deaths. The results suggest that platinum-based chemotherapy is better than nonplatinum therapy, show a trend in favour of platinum combinations over single-agent platinum, and suggest that cisplatin and carboplatin are equally effective. There is no good evidence that cisplatin is more or less effective than carboplatin in any particular subgroup of patients.Keywords: meta-analysis; systematic review; randomized controlled trials; advanced ovarian cancer; chemotherapy Health care professionals and patients alike are becoming increasingly aware of the need to make medical decisions on the basis of up-to-date, objective and unbiased research (Chalmers and Haynes, 1994). The most reliable information results from randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Unfortunately, most RCTs, including those conducted in ovarian cancer, have been too small to demonstrate moderate treatment benefits with reliability, and many results have been inconclusive or contradictory. The Advanced Ovarian Cancer Trialists Group (AOCTG) recognized that the best means of synthesizing such randomized evidence is by systematic meta-analysis. In 1988, five meta-analyses of chemotherapy in advanced ovarian cancer using updated individual patient data were initiated. The first results were published in 1991 (AOCTG, 1991). The AOCTG recognized the importance of updating these results especially for the comparison of carboplatin and cisplatin, in which the data were relatively immature. The comparison of platinum analogues was considered of such clinical importance that further new investigations were initiated to identify whether any particular type of women or tumour would benefit more from either cisplatin-or carboplatin-based chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODSTrials were eligible for inclusion provided they examined first-line chemotherapy for advanced ovarian cancer, were properly randomized and made one of the treatment comparisons described below. Trials were identified by bibliographic searches using MEDLINE and CancerLit, by hand searching relevant meeting proceedings and by consulting trial registers (AOCTG, 1991). Both published and unpublished trials were included and updated data were sought for all randomized patients. All data were checked thoroughly and the final database entries for each trial were verified by the responsible trialist or data centre.All analyses were based on intention to treat. Survival analyses were stratified by trial, and t...

Stage I ovarian serous LMP tumors rarely, if ever, recur. Limited resection, after meticulous surgical exploration, is adequate therapy for women of reproductive age.

Background: During an international workshop held in September 1998, a group of specialists in the field of ovarian cancer reached consensus on a number of issues with implications for standard practice and for research of advanced epithelial ovarian cancer.Methods: Five groups of experts considered several issues which incl uded: biologic factors, prognostic factors, surgery, init ial chemotherapy, second-line treatment, the use of CA 125, investigational drugs, intra-peritoneal treatment and high-dose chemotherapy. The group attempted to arrive at answers to questions such as: Are there prognostic factors, which help to identify patients who will not do well with CUITent therapy? What is the current best therapy for advanced ovarian carcinoma? What directions sho uld research take in advanced ovarian cancer? T hese issues were discussed in a plenary meeting.

No abstract