We have located links that may give you full text access.
The changes in residual cancer burden after interval debulking surgery are effective in evaluating the response to adjuvant chemotherapy.
Chemotherapy 2011
OBJECTIVE: To study the clinical significance of the change of residual cancer burden (RCB) of epithelial ovarian carcinoma (EOC) between primary (PDS) and interval debulking surgery (IDS) in order to evaluate the effectiveness of adjuvant chemotherapy.
METHODS: Thirty-eight EOC patients with suboptimal PDS with adjuvant chemotherapy were selected for this retrospective study and divided into pathologically negative (group A) and pathologically positive (group B) groups based on the histopathological examination and the change of size of residual disease after IDS. Patients in group B were further divided into groups B1 (partial remission criteria, n = 9), B2 (consistent with stable disease, n = 12) and B3 (consistent with disease progression, n = 4) based on the changes in RCB between PDS and IDS and the guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, RECIST). The responses to chemotherapy evaluated by pathological examination of RCB versus by CA-125, recurrence patterns, and prognoses were analyzed.
RESULTS: The clinical benefit rates evaluated by pathological assessment for groups A, B1, B2 and B3 were 100, 100, 100 and 0%, respectively (p < 0.01), whereas the rates were not statistically different when evaluated by CA-125 (100, 100, 91.7 and 100%, respectively; p > 0.05). The median progression-free survival (PFS) for patients in groups A and B was 36 and 6 months, respectively (p < 0.05); the median overall survival (OS) was 93 and 42 months, respectively (p < 0.05). There were no significant differences in median PFS or OS among patients in groups B1, B2 and B3 (PFS: 16, 6 and 1.5 months; OS: 52, 31 and 30.5 months, respectively; all p > 0.05), but there were significant differences in median PFS or OS between B1 and B3. There was no significant difference in recurrence rates between groups A and B (53.8 vs. 72.0%, p > 0.05), but there were significant differences in the rate of drug-resistant recurrence [28.6% (2/7) vs. 72.2% (13/18), p < 0.05] and in median PFS of relapsed patients (19 vs. 4 months, p < 0.05).
CONCLUSION: The histopathological assessment of RCB between PDS and IDS may be used to evaluate and predict the response to adjuvant chemotherapy in EOC.
METHODS: Thirty-eight EOC patients with suboptimal PDS with adjuvant chemotherapy were selected for this retrospective study and divided into pathologically negative (group A) and pathologically positive (group B) groups based on the histopathological examination and the change of size of residual disease after IDS. Patients in group B were further divided into groups B1 (partial remission criteria, n = 9), B2 (consistent with stable disease, n = 12) and B3 (consistent with disease progression, n = 4) based on the changes in RCB between PDS and IDS and the guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, RECIST). The responses to chemotherapy evaluated by pathological examination of RCB versus by CA-125, recurrence patterns, and prognoses were analyzed.
RESULTS: The clinical benefit rates evaluated by pathological assessment for groups A, B1, B2 and B3 were 100, 100, 100 and 0%, respectively (p < 0.01), whereas the rates were not statistically different when evaluated by CA-125 (100, 100, 91.7 and 100%, respectively; p > 0.05). The median progression-free survival (PFS) for patients in groups A and B was 36 and 6 months, respectively (p < 0.05); the median overall survival (OS) was 93 and 42 months, respectively (p < 0.05). There were no significant differences in median PFS or OS among patients in groups B1, B2 and B3 (PFS: 16, 6 and 1.5 months; OS: 52, 31 and 30.5 months, respectively; all p > 0.05), but there were significant differences in median PFS or OS between B1 and B3. There was no significant difference in recurrence rates between groups A and B (53.8 vs. 72.0%, p > 0.05), but there were significant differences in the rate of drug-resistant recurrence [28.6% (2/7) vs. 72.2% (13/18), p < 0.05] and in median PFS of relapsed patients (19 vs. 4 months, p < 0.05).
CONCLUSION: The histopathological assessment of RCB between PDS and IDS may be used to evaluate and predict the response to adjuvant chemotherapy in EOC.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices 
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app