The use of weekly topotecan in the treatment of heavily pretreated recurrent epithelial ovarian and primary peritoneal cancer: The Kaohsiung Chang Gung experience

Hu, Ching Fen; Ou, Yu‐Che; Fu, Hung-Chun; Chien, Chan Chao Chang; Tsai, Chung Chueng; Wu, Chen; Lin, Hao

doi:10.1016/j.tjog.2014.11.005

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…[22] Another report by Hu in 2015 presented Topotecan in heavily pretreated ovarian cancer, and their median progression-free survival as well as overall survival were 3 months and 20 months respectively. [23] From Fig 4, there were 62 in total 70 patients (88.6%) of group A and B receiving at least two lines of chemotherapy before enrolling into our study. However, the ratio was 69% in study by Chou[22] and 75% by Hu.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Outcomes and prognoses of patients with ovarian cancer using bevacizumab: 6-year experience in a tertiary care hospital of northern Taiwan

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeBevacizumab (BEV) has been used for ovarian cancer (OC) for years in Taiwan, but the associated data related to outcome is scant. This retrospective study reviewed patients with OC treated with BEV and analyzed their results.Patients and methodsAll patients with OC treated with BEV from 2009 to 2015 in the Linkou branch of Chang Gung Memorial Hospital in Northern Taiwan were included. According to the means of administration, the patients were classified into 6 groups as follows: A—BEV plus chemotherapy (C/T) for initial platinum-resistant (PR) recurrent OC, B—BEV plus C/T for initial platinum-sensitive (PS) recurrent OC, C—BEV alone for recurrent OC, D—BEV plus 1st adjuvant C/T, E—BEV plus neoadjuvant C/T, and F—intraperitoneal (IP) BEV. Progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), hazard ratios (HRs), overall response rate (ORR), and mean number of BEV cycles were analyzed for groups A to E. Clinical improvement of ascites was assessed for group F.ResultsA comparison of early use (only one round of prior C/T) versus late use (multiple rounds of prior C/T) in patients of groups A and B showed a superior PFS (8.27 vs. 3.67, p = 0.037) in the early use group. No significant differences were found between groups A and B (PFS: 4.24 vs. 4.17 months, p = 0.690; OS: 10.06 vs. 9.93 months, p = 0.819; mean BEV cycles: 4.63 vs. 5.0 p = 0.992; ORR: 48.1% vs. 53.5%, p = 0.425). Comparing the response and non-response subgroups of patients in groups A and B, a better outcome was associated with endometrioid type cell (HR = 0.28, p = 0.008), good ECOG performance status (HR = 0.51, p = 0.005), and lack of ascites (HR = 0.67, p = 0.004). Comparing group C with groups A plus B, the BEV alone group had a poorer PFS (1.02 VS. 4.19, p = 0.04) and OS (1.42 VS. 9.99 p = 0.001) than the BEV plus C/T group. In group F, a good clinical benefit rate (85.6%) of ascites improvement was noted. Two patients had grade 5 gastrointestinal bleeding and venous/arterial thromboembolic events after administration of BEV. Grade 3 neutropenia and thrombocytopenia occurred more frequently in our study.ConclusionEarly use of BEV combined with chemotherapy had a significant benefit in PFS for patients with recurrent OC. BEV plus chemotherapy was better than BEV alone for recurrent OC. In addition, IP BEV was helpful for improving clinical ascites.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, the ratio was 69% in study by Chou[22] and 75% by Hu. [23] Thus, much more patients with heavily-pretreated ovarian cancer may lead our outcome lower than others.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%