Dataset Information

Optimal number of neoadjuvant chemotherapy cycles prior to interval debulking surgery in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of progression-free survival and overall survival.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) represents a treatment option in patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (AEOC) who are not good candidates for primary debulking surgery. Usually, 3 cycles of chemotherapy before surgery have been considered the best option for patient survival, although quite often some patients receive more than 3 cycles. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to identify the optimal number of NACT cycles reporting better survival in AEOC patients.

Methods

PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Scopus were searched for original articles that analyzed the relationship between the number of chemotherapy cycles and clinical outcomes in AEOC patients before interval debulking surgery (IDS). The main outcomes were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS).

Results

A total of 22 studies comprising 7,005 patients diagnosed with AEOC were included in our analysis. In terms of survival, the reviewed studies dividing the patients in ≤3 NACT cycles vs. >3, showed a trend for a decrease in PFS and a significant reduction in OS with an increasing number of cycles, while a difference in both PFS and OS was revealed if early IDS included patients with 4 NACT cycles. These results should be interpreted with caution due to the complex characteristics of AEOC patients.

Conclusion

In conclusion, our review and meta-analysis revealed that there is not enough evidence to determine the optimal number of NACT treatments before surgery. Further research in the form of well-designed randomized controlled trials is necessary to address this issue.

Trial registration

PROSPERO Identifier: CRD42022334959.

SUBMITTER: Coada CA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10627748 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Optimal number of neoadjuvant chemotherapy cycles prior to interval debulking surgery in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of progression-free survival and overall survival.

Coada Camelia Alexandra CA Dondi Giulia G Ravegnini Gloria G Di Costanzo Stella S Tesei Marco M Fiuzzi Enrico E Di Stanislao Marco M Giunchi Susanna S Zamagni Claudio C Bovicelli Alessandro A Hrelia Patrizia P Angelini Sabrina S De Iaco Pierandrea P Perrone Anna Myriam AM

Journal of gynecologic oncology 20230905 6

<h4>Objective</h4>Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) represents a treatment option in patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (AEOC) who are not good candidates for primary debulking surgery. Usually, 3 cycles of chemotherapy before surgery have been considered the best option for patient survival, although quite often some patients receive more than 3 cycles. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to identify the optimal number of NACT cycles reporting better survival in ...[more]

PMID: 37743060

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionDelays from primary surgery to chemotherapy are associated with worse survival in ovarian cancer, however the impact of delays from neoadjuvant chemotherapy to interval debulking surgery is unknown. We sought to evaluate the association of delays from neoadjuvant chemotherapy to interval debulking with survival.MethodsPatients with a diagnosis of stage III/IV ovarian cancer receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy from July 2015 to December 2017 were included in our analysis. Delays from neoadjuvant chemotherapy to interval debulking were defined as time from last preoperative carboplatin to interval debulking >6 weeks. Fisher's exact/Wilcoxon rank sum tests were used to compare clinical characteristics. The Kaplan-Meier method, log-rank test, and multivariate Cox Proportional-Hazards models were used to estimate progression-free and overall survival and examine differences by delay groups, adjusting for covariates.ResultsOf the 224 women, 159 (71%) underwent interval debulking and 34 (21%) of these experienced delays from neoadjuvant chemotherapy to interval debulking. These women were older (median 68 vs 65 years, P=0.05) and received more preoperative chemotherapy cycles (median 6 vs 4, P=0.003). Delays from neoadjuvant chemotherapy to interval debulking were associated with worse overall survival (HR 2.4 95% CI 1.2 to 4.8, P=0.01), however survival was not significantly shortened after adjusting for age, stage, and complete gross resection, HR 1.66 95% CI 0.8 to 3.4, P=0.17. Delays from neoadjuvant chemotherapy to interval debulking were not associated with worse progression-free survival (HR 1.55 95% CI 0.97 to 2.5, P=0.062). Increase in number of preoperative cycles (P=0.005) and lack of complete gross resection (P<0.001) were the only variables predictive of worse progression-free survival.DiscussionDelays from neoadjuvant chemotherapy to interval debulking were not associated with worse overall survival after adjustment for age, stage, and complete gross resection.

Project description:BackgroundThe optimal number of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) cycles for resectable colorectal liver oligometastases (CLOM) remains unclear. The aim of this study was to investigate the optimal number of NAC cycles.MethodsOne hundred twenty-nine consecutive patients were included in this study. X-tile analysis was implemented to investigate the optimal cut-off point for NAC cycles. Propensity score matching was performed to reduce selection bias. Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox risk regression models were used to analyse progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS).ResultsThe optimal cut-off point for NAC cycles was 5. There were no significant differences in R0 resection, pathological response or postoperative complications between the groups with a low number of NAC cycles group (≤5 cycles, n=80) and high number of NAC cycles (>5 cycles, n=49). Patients with a high number of NAC cycles were more likely to have NAC toxicity than those with a low number of cycles (87.8% vs. 65.0%, P=0.004). Multivariate analysis revealed that >5 NAC cycles was an independent predictor of reduced PFS (HR =1.808, 95% CI: 1.205-2.712, P=0.004) and reduced OS (HR =1.723, 95% CI: 1.041-2.851, P=0.034). In the oxaliplatin-based regimen group, patients with a low number of NAC cycles had a better PFS (P<0.001, mPFS: 14.7 vs. 5.4 months) and better OS (P=0.018, mOS: 57.7 months vs. 41.0 months) than those with a high number of cycles. After 1:1 propensity matching (34 cases vs. 34 cases), multivariate analysis revealed that >5 NAC cycles was an independent predictor of reduced PFS (HR =2.265, 95% CI: 1.281-4.007, P=0.005) and reduced OS (HR =2.813, 95% CI: 1.359-5.822, P=0.005). In the oxaliplatin-based regimen group, patients with a low number of NAC cycles had better PFS (P<0.001, mPFS: 17.5 vs. 5.6 months) and better OS (P=0.008, mOS: 59.0 vs. 31.8 months) than those with a high number of cycles.ConclusionsFewer than 5 NAC cycles was optimal for biologically resectable CLOM patients. Giving more than 5 NAC cycles was unnecessary because a higher number of NAC cycles has more unfavourable survival and higher NAC toxicities, while leading to similar R0 resection rates and pathological responses.

Project description:ObjectiveAlthough trials of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in ovarian cancer use 3 neoadjuvant cycles, real-world practice varies. We sought to evaluate the influence of increasing pre-operative cycles on survival, accounting for surgical outcomes.MethodsWe identified 199 women with newly diagnosed ovarian cancer recommended for neoadjuvant chemotherapy who underwent interval debulking surgery from July 2015 to December 2018. Non-parametric tests were used to compare clinical characteristics by neoadjuvant cycles. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate differences in progression-free and overall survival. The log-rank test was used to assess the relationship of covariates to outcome.ResultsThe median number of neoadjuvant cycles was 4 (range 3-8), with 56 (28%) women receiving ≥5 cycles. Compared with those receiving 3 or 4, women with ≥5 neoadjuvant cycles received fewer or no post-operative cycles (p<0.001) but had no other differences in clinical factors (p>0.05). Complete gross resection rates were similar among those receiving 3, 4, and ≥5 neoadjuvant cycles (68.5%, 70%, and 71.4%, respectively, p=0.96). There were no significant differences in progression-free or overall survival when comparing 3 versus 4 neoadjuvant cycles. However, more cycles (≥5 vs 4) were associated with worse progression-free survival, even after adjustment for BRCA status and complete gross resection (HR 2.20, 95% CI 1.45 to 3.33, p<0.001), and worse overall survival, even after adjustment for histology, response on imaging, and complete gross resection rates (HR 2.78, 95% CI 1.37 to 5.63, p=0.016). The most common reason for receiving ≥5 cycles was extent of disease requiring more neoadjuvant chemotherapy.ConclusionsDespite maximal cytoreduction, patients receiving ≥5 neoadjuvant cycles have a poorer prognosis than those receiving 3-4 cycles. Future studies should focus on reducing surgical morbidity and optimizing novel therapies in this high-risk group.

Dataset Information

Optimal number of neoadjuvant chemotherapy cycles prior to interval debulking surgery in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of progression-free survival and overall survival.

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Trial registration

Publications

Optimal number of neoadjuvant chemotherapy cycles prior to interval debulking surgery in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of progression-free survival and overall survival.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets