Search

Background: The OVHIPEC-1 trial previously showed that the addition of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) to interval cytoreductive surgery resulted in improved progression-free and overall survival compared with cytoreductive surgery alone at 4·7 years of follow-up in patients with stage III epithelial ovarian cancer who were ineligible for primary cytoreduction. We report the final survival outcomes after 10 years of follow-up., Methods: In this open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial, patients with primary epithelial stage III ovarian cancer were recruited at eight HIPEC centres in the Netherlands and Belgium. Patients were eligible if they were aged 18-76 years, had not progressed during at least three cycles of neoadjuvant carboplatin plus paclitaxel, had a WHO performance status score of 0-2, normal blood counts, and adequate renal function. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to undergo interval cytoreductive surgery without HIPEC (surgery group) or with HIPEC (100 mg/m 2 cisplatin; surgery-plus-HIPEC group). Randomisation was done centrally by minimisation with a masked web-based allocation procedure at the time of surgery when residual disease smaller than 10 mm diameter was anticipated, and was stratified by institution, previous suboptimal cytoreductive surgery, and number of abdominal regions involved. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival and a secondary endpoint was overall survival, analysed in the intention-to-treat population (ie, all randomly assigned patients). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00426257, and is closed., Findings: Between April 1, 2007, and April 30, 2016, 245 patients were enrolled and followed up for a median of 10·1 years (95% CI 8·4-12·9) in the surgery group (n=123) and 10·4 years (95% CI 9·5-13·3) in the surgery-plus-HIPEC group (n=122). Recurrence, progression, or death occurred in 114 (93%) patients in the surgery group (median progression-free survival 10·7 months [95% CI 9·6-12·0]) and 109 (89%) patients in the surgery-plus-HIPEC group (14·3 months [12·0-18·5]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·63 [95% CI 0·48-0·83], stratified log-rank p=0·0008). Death occurred in 108 (88%) patients in the surgery group (median overall survival 33·3 months [95% CI 29·0-39·1]) and 100 (82%) patients in the surgery-plus-HIPEC group (44·9 months [95% CI 38·6-55·1]; HR 0·70 [95% CI 0·53-0·92], stratified log-rank p=0·011)., Interpretation: These updated survival results confirm the long-term survival benefit of HIPEC in patients with primary stage III epithelial ovarian cancer undergoing interval cytoreductive surgery., Funding: Dutch Cancer Foundation (KWF Kankerbestrijding)., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests IHJTdH has received institutional research support from Roche and Quality in Products & Service/RanD. PV has received conference fees and travel expenses from Roche and honoraria from Roche (Genentech), Novartis, and MSD Oncology. KKVdV has served on advisory boards for Exact Sciences and AstraZeneca. GSS has received institutional research support from Merck Sharp & Dohme, Agendia, AstraZeneca, Roche, and Novartis, and consulting fees from Biovica and Seagen. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Complication rates after cytoreductive surgery are important quality indicators for hospitals that treat patients with advanced-stage ovarian cancer. Case-mix factors are patient and tumor characteristics that may influence hospital outcomes such as the complication rates. Currently, no case-mix adjustment model exists for complications after cytoreductive surgery; therefore, it is unclear whether hospitals are being compared correctly. This study aims to develop the first case-mix adjustment model for complications after surgery for advanced-stage ovarian cancer, enabling an accurate comparison between hospitals., Methods: This population-based study included all patients undergoing cytoreductive surgery for advanced-stage ovarian cancer registered in the Netherlands in 2017-2019. Case-mix variables were identified and assessed using logistic regressions. The primary outcome was the composite outcome measure 'complicated course'. Patients had a complicated course when at least one of the following criteria were met: (1) any complication combined with a prolonged length of hospital stay; (2) complication requiring reintervention; (3) any complication with a prolonged length of stay in the intensive care unit; or (4) 30-day mortality or in-hospital mortality during admission following surgery. Inter-hospital variation was analyzed using univariable and multivariable logistic regressions and visualized using funnel plots., Results: A total of 1822 patients were included, of which 10.7% (n=195) had a complicated course. Comorbidity and tumor stage had a significant impact on complicated course rates in multivariable logistic regression. Inter-hospital variation was not significant for case-mix factors. Complicated course rates ranged between 2.2% and 29.1%, and case-mix adjusted observed/expected ratios ranged from 0.20 to 2.67 between hospitals. Three hospitals performed outside the confidence intervals for complicated course rates. These hospitals remained outliers after case-mix adjustment., Conclusion: There is variation between hospitals regarding complicated course rates after cytoreductive surgery for ovarian cancer in the Netherlands. While comorbidity and tumor stage significantly affected the complicated course rates, adjusting for case-mix factors did not significantly affect hospital outcomes. The limited impact of case-mix adjustment could be a result of the Dutch centralized healthcare model., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© IGCS and ESGO 2023. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: Clinical Quality Registries (CQRs) were initiated in order to compare clinical outcomes between hospitals or regions within a country. To get an overview of these CQRs worldwide the aim of this study was to identify these CQRs for gynecological oncology and to summarize their characteristics, processes and QI's and to establish whether it is feasible to make an international comparison in the future., Methods: To identify CQRs in gynecological oncology a literature search in Pubmed was performed. All papers describing the use of a CQR were included. Administrative, epidemiological and cancer registries were excluded as these registries do not primarily serve to measure quality of care through QI's. The taskforce or contact person of the included CQR were asked to participate and share information on registered items, processes and indicators., Results: Five nations agreed to collaborate: Australia, Denmark, Italy, the Netherlands and Sweden. Denmark, Netherlands and Sweden established a nationwide registry, collecting data on multiple tumor types, and various QI's. Australia and Italy included patients with ovarian cancer only. All nations had a different process to report feedback results to participating hospitals., Conclusion: CQRs serve the same purpose to improve quality of care but vary on different aspects. Although similarities are observed in the topics measured by the QI's, an international comparison was not feasible as numerators or denominators differ between registries. In order to compare on an international level it would be useful to harmonize these registries and to set an international standard to measure the quality of care with similar indicators., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest There was no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: The addition of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) to interval cytoreductive surgery (CRS) improves recurrence-free (RFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with FIGO stage III ovarian cancer. We evaluated the effect of HIPEC on patient's health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in the OVHIPEC trial., Materials and Methods: OVHIPEC was a multicentre, open-label, randomized phase III trial for patients with stage III ovarian cancer. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive interval CRS with or without HIPEC with cisplatin. HRQoL was assessed using the EORTC QLQ-C30, and the ovarian (QLQ-OV28) and colorectal cancer (QLQ-CR38) modules. HRQoL questionnaires were administered at baseline, after surgery, after end of treatment, and every three months thereafter. HRQoL was a secondary endpoint, with the prespecified focus on the QLQ-C30 summary score and symptom scores on fatigue, neuropathy and gastro-intestinal symptoms. HRQoL was analysed using linear and non-linear mixed effect models., Results: In total, 245 patients were randomized. One-hundred-ninety-seven patients (80%) completed at least one questionnaire. No significant difference over time in the QLQ-C30 summary scores was observed between the study arms (p-values for linear and non-linear growth: p > 0.133). The pattern over time for fatigue, neuropathy and gastro-intestinal symptoms did not significantly differ between treatment arms., Conclusion: The addition of HIPEC to interval CRS does not negatively impact HRQoL in patients with stage III ovarian cancer who are treated with interval CRS due to the extent of disease. These HRQoL results, together with the improvement in RFS and OS, support the viability of HIPEC as an important treatment option in this patient population. CLINICALTRIALS., Gov Number: NCT00426257., Eudract Number: 2006-003466-34., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd, BASO ~ The Association for Cancer Surgery, and the European Society of Surgical Oncology. All rights reserved.)

Background: Standard treatment for International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) 2018 stage 1B2 cervical cancer (i.e., tumor size between 2 and 4 cm) is a radical hysterectomy (RH) with pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND). We evaluated the oncological and fertility outcomes treatment in patients receiving a fertility-sparing alternative consisting of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) followed by vaginal radical trachelectomy (VRT)., Methods: Patients with stage 1B2 cervical cancer who wished to preserve fertility were included from September 2009 to September 2018. NACT consisted of 6-week cycles of cisplatin or carboplatin with paclitaxel. If tumor size decreased to 2 cm or smaller, NACT was followed by a robot-assisted PLND and VRT., Results: Eighteen patients were included. Median follow-up time was 49.7 months (range 11.4-110.8). Median tumor size was 32 mm (range 22-40 mm). Complete remission after NACT occurred in seven women. Four women had a poor response on NACT. Three underwent RH with PLND; one received chemoradiation after PLND instead of VRT because of positive lymph nodes. The remaining 14 patients received VRT 3-4 weeks after NACT. Four recurrences occurred: three after NACT and VRT and one after NACT and RH. Median time to recurrence was 20.8 months (range 17.0-105.7). Three recurrences occurred in women with adenocarcinoma with lymph vascular space invasion (LVSI). In four women fertility could not be preserved. To date, four women had six pregnancies, including three live births born at term, two first trimester miscarriages, and one currently ongoing pregnancy., Conclusion: NACT and VRT in women with stage 1B2 cervical cancer showed promising results. In 78% fertility was preserved. However, patients with poor response on NACT and with adenocarcinoma and/or LVSI were possibly at risk for recurrence. Long-term results in relation to fertility and oncological outcome are needed to corroborate these findings., Implications for Practice: Standard treatment for women with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) 2018 stage 1B2 cervical cancer (tumor size 2-4 cm) is a radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND). However, many of these women are young and wish to preserve fertility. Data on fertility-sparing treatment options are sparse, but neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by a vaginal radical trachelectomy and PLND could be an alternative. Since 2009 we performed an observational cohort study in which 18 women opted for this treatment in our center. In 14 women fertility could be preserved. In four patients the tumor recurred. In four women six pregnancies occurred. After careful selection this treatment could be a good fertility-sparing treatment option., (© 2020 The Authors. The Oncologist published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of AlphaMed Press.)