Association of lymphadenectomy and survival in epithelial ovarian cancer

Ercelep, Özlem; Özçelik, Melike; Gümüş, Mahmut

doi:10.1016/j.currproblcancer.2018.08.002

Cited by 18 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Lymphadenectomy was reported to significantly improve the PFS by 72% and OS by 61%, notably after the dissection of both pelvic and paraaortic lymph nodes. 16 Study limitations. The 2 major limitations for the present study include the retrospective design and small sample size.…”

Section: Prognostic Value Of Histological Features Of Epithelial Ovar...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Survival and prognostic factors in women treated for epithelial ovarian cancer in western region of Saudi Arabia

Sait

Alam

Haque

et al. 2022

SMJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: To assess survival and prognostic factors among women with epithelial ovarian cancer in Western Saudi Arabia.Methods: A retrospective cohort study was carried out between October 2000 and May 2018, reviewing clinical and pathology data of all women who underwent staging or debulking surgery for epithelial ovarian cancer. Analysis of disease-free survival (DFS), overall survivals (OS) and the associated factors used Kaplan-Meier method in addition to cox multivariate regression.Results: A total of 144 patients were included (median age=49.5 years), with a median follow-up time was Original Article3.4 years. Majority (59.7%) of the patients were diagnosed at an advanced stage (III or IV). The mean (95% CI) DFS was 82.3 (67.8-96.8) months, OS was 96.2 (81.3-111.2) months, and the 5-year survival rate was estimated as 38.9%. Univariate analysis showed that older age, clear cell or papillary carcinoma subtypes, serous type, advanced International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage and the presence of residual disease were associated with poorer DFS and OS (log rank <0.05). Cox regression showed FIGO stage and residual disease >1cm as the strongest prognostic factors independently associated with DFS and OS. Conclusion:Improving early diagnosis and achieving optimal cytoreduction are the most critical challenges to achieve significant positive impact on survival of women with epithelial ovarian cancer.

show abstract

Section: Prognostic Value Of Histological Features Of Epithelial Ovar...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Survival and prognostic factors in women treated for epithelial ovarian cancer in western region of Saudi Arabia

Sait

Alam

Haque

et al. 2022

SMJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A recent retrospective study mentioned that dissection of more than 10 lymph nodes is a significant prognostic parameter. This article, also, referred a longer survival in patients underwent paraaortic and pelvic lymph node compared to patients underwent only pelvic lymphadenectomy and an improved progression free survival in patients underwent lymphadenectomy [15]. Moreover, a study observed significant beneficial effects of systematic lymph node dissection during primary debulking surgery on both progression free and overall survival in patients with negative lymphadenopathy on a preoperatively CT scan [16].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 81%

Survey on the current gynaecological approach of ovarian cancer patients: The utility of HIPEC

Iavazzo

Fotiou

Tsiatas

et al. 2020

Pleura and Peritoneum

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe aim of this survey was to acquire an overview of the current management of ovarian cancer with an emphasis on the utility of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC).Methods: An email was sent to Oncologists prior to PSOGI International Symposium on Advanced Ovarian Cancer, Athens 11–13 April 2019. Doctors submitted responses on the relevant website. The self-report survey contained 17 questions.ResultsIn total, 467 Medical Oncologists, Surgical Oncologists or Gynaecologic Oncologists were participated and answered to this survey. The resectability of disease was evaluated by laparoscopy from 48.5% of the participants, while 51.5% answered that they stage their patients pre-surgically with the use of CT or MRI. The preferred first intervention in advanced ovarian cancer patients is the neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by interval cytoreductive surgery (72%). Regarding the use of HIPEC, almost half of the participants answered that there is role of HIPEC use in ovarian cancer patients undergoing interval debulking surgery, while almost 70% answered positively about the utility of HIPEC use in ovarian cancer recurrence. As for the role of lymphadenectomy in advanced ovarian cancer patients, half of the responders answered negatively. Finally, only 25% of the participants responded that they always check the BRCA status of their ovarian cancer patients, despite the possible differentiation of treatment based on the molecular profiling (80%).ConclusionsThe results of this survey indicate the utility of HIPEC in treatment of ovarian cancer patients and the differences in the overall management of ovarian cancer patients in the current clinical practice.

show abstract

“…Early stages were addressed by 3 studies (stage I-IIIa ( 21), stage I and II (32), and stage I ( 34)). Three studies include all stage in their cohort (17,29,30). Women who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by debulking surgery were exclusively selected in 7 studies (9,14,15,19,20,28,34).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prognostic value of systematic lymphadenectomy in patients with ovarian cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AlMahdy¹,

Elassall²,

Abdelbadee

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Standard management of ovarian cancer is surgical debulking and adjuvant chemotherapy. The role of systematic lymphadenectomy, as a part of debulking, has been controversial. Objective: To assess prognostic value of systematic lymphadenectomy in women with ovarian cancer based on stage, control group and type of chemotherapy Search strategy: A literature search was conducted on SCOPUS, PUBMED, COCHRANE, MEDLINE, and WEB OF SCIENCE databases. Selection criteria: All comparative studies that assess outcomes of systematic lymphadenectomy in patients with ovarian cancer were eligible. Data Collection and Analysis: overall survival was analyzed by pooling log hazard ratio (HR) and standard error of multivariable Cox regression models. MOGGE Meta-analysis Matrix is a novel illustration tool that was used to demonstrate multiple subgroup analyses of included studies. Main results: Twenty-two studies were eligible. Systematic lymphadenectomy was associated with better overall survival, that was close to significance, compared to control group (HR 0.93, 95%CI 0.86-1.00). Among women treated with adjuvant chemotherapy, overall survival improved in women with stage IIB-IV who underwent systematic lymphadenectomy (HR 0.91, 95%CI 0.84-0.99) and was most significant among patients with III to IV (HR 0.85, 95%CI 0.73-0.99). Systematic lymphadenectomy did not improve survival in women who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy (HR 0.97, 95%CI 0.73-1.29). Systematic lymphadenectomy was associated with improved progress-free survival compared to control group (HR 0.88, 95%CI 0.79-0.99). Conclusion: Data from clinical trials do not support role of systematic lymphadenectomy in advanced ovarian cancer. However, further studies may be warranted to assess substage-specific survival outcomes in women with advanced stages.

show abstract

Association of lymphadenectomy and survival in epithelial ovarian cancer

Cited by 18 publications

References 24 publications

Survival and prognostic factors in women treated for epithelial ovarian cancer in western region of Saudi Arabia

Survival and prognostic factors in women treated for epithelial ovarian cancer in western region of Saudi Arabia

Survey on the current gynaecological approach of ovarian cancer patients: The utility of HIPEC

Prognostic value of systematic lymphadenectomy in patients with ovarian cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About