RESUMO
Objective: to analyze the evolution of surgical techniques and strategies, and to determine their influence on the survival of patients with stage III or IV epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). Methods: a retrospective data analysis was performed in two French tertiary cancer institutes. The analysis included clinical information, cytoreductive outcome (complete, optimal and suboptimal), definitive pathology, Overall Survival (OS), and Progression-Free Survival (PFS). Three surgical strategies were compared: Primary Cytoreductive Surgery (PCS), Interval Cytoreductive Surgery (ICS) after three cycles of Neo-Adjuvant Chemotherapy (NAC), and Final Cytoreductive Surgery (FCS) after at least six cycles of NAC. We analyzed four distinct time intervals: prior to 2000, between 2000 and 2004, between 2005 and 2009, and after 2009. Results: data from 1474 patients managed for International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stages III (80%) or IV (20%) EOC were analyzed. Throughout the four time intervals, the rate of patients who were treated only medically increased significantly (10.1% vs. 22.6% p < 0.001). NAC treatment increased from 20.1% to 52.2% (p < 0.001). Complete resection rate increased from 37% to 66.2% (p < 0.001). Of our study population, 1260 patients (85.5%) underwent surgery. OS was longer in cases of complete cytoreduction (Hazard Ratio (HR) = 2.123 CI 95% [1.816-2.481] p < 0.001) but the surgical strategy itself did not affect median OS. OS was 44.9 months, 50.3 months, and 42 months for PCS, ICS, and FCS, respectively (p = 0.410). After adjusting for surgical strategies (PCS, ICS, and FCS), all patients with complete cytoreduction presented similar OS with no significant difference. However, PFS was three months shorter when FCS was compared to PCS (p < 0.001). Conclusion: In our 30 years' experience of EOC management, complete resection rate was the only independent factor that significantly improved OS and PFS, regardless of the surgical strategy.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: In cases where breast conservative surgery was performed for infiltrative ductal carcinoma (IDC), margin status is an independent prognostic factor for local ipsilateral relapse (LIR). There is no validated definition of a clear margin. We investigated factors associated with residual disease on re-excision specimen and the impact of margin status on the risk of LIR. METHODS: From January 1992 to December 2002, 454 patients were retrospectively included. Patients had undergone conservative surgery and radiotherapy for IDC. Two groups were defined: group 1, involved or close margin (<3 mm) and a re-excision; and group 2, involved or close margin without re-excision. The risk factors for residual disease in the re-excision specimen were analyzed in group 1, and the rate of 5-year LIR was analyzed in both groups. RESULTS: Among patients who experienced a surgical re-excision for involved or close margin, 21% (55 of 206) had residual tumor. The multivariate analysis showed that only a margin involved with intraductal carcinoma remained predictive for residual disease. According to the multivariate analysis, only hormone therapy (p < 10(-6)), diffuse involved margins (p = 0.003), and margins involved with intraductal component (p < 10(-6)) were predictive of LIR. Re-excision for a margin involved with intraductal carcinoma significantly improved local relapse-free survival (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In cases of IDC, re-excision for a close margin or a focally involved margin had no impact on local relapse-free survival. The decision to perform a surgical re-excision for an involved margin should not be systematic but should take multiple risk factors into consideration, such as patient age or margin diffuse involvement.