A pre-operative scoring model to estimate the risk of blood transfusion over an ovarian cancer debulking surgery (BLOODS score): a Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center Team Ovary study.

OBJECTIVES: To develop a pre-operative tool to estimate the risk of peri-operative packed red blood cell transfusion in primary debulking surgery. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed an institutional database to identify patients who underwent primary debulking surgery for ovarian cancer at a single center between January 1, 2001 and May 31, 2019. Receiver operating characteristic curve and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) were calculated. Five-fold cross-validation was applied to the multivariate model. Significant variables were assigned a 'BLOODS' (BLood transfusion Over an Ovarian cancer Debulking Surgery) score of +1 if present. A total BLOODS score was calculated for each patient, and the odds of receiving a transfusion was determined for each score. RESULTS: Overall, 1566 patients met eligibility criteria; 800 (51%) underwent a peri-operative blood transfusion. Odds ratios (OR) were statistically significant for American Society of Anesthesiologists scores of 3 and 4 (OR 1.34, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.09 to 1.63), pre-operative levels of cancer antigen 125 (CA125) (OR 2.43, 95% CI 1.98 to 2.99), platelets (OR 1.59, 95% CI 1.45 to 1.74), obesity (OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.96), presence of carcinomatosis (OR 2.45, 95% CI 1.93 to 3.11), bulky upper abdominal disease (OR 2.86, 95% CI 2.32 to 3.54), pre-operative serum albumin level (OR 0.31, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.40), and pre-operative hemoglobin level (OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.61). The corrected AUC was 0.748 (95% CI 0.693 to 0.804). BLOODS scores of 0 and 5 corresponded to 11% and 73% odds, respectively, of receiving a peri-operative blood transfusion. CONCLUSIONS: We developed a universal pre-operative scoring system, the BLOODS score, to help identify patients with ovarian cancer who would benefit from surgical planning and blood-saving techniques. The BLOODS score was directly proportional to the American Society of Anesthesiologists score, presence of upper abdominal disease, carcinomatosis, CA125 level, and platelets level. We believe this model can help physicians with surgical planning and can benefit patient outcomes.

Survival Difference of Endometrial Cancer Patients with Peritoneal Metastasis Receiving Cytoreductive Surgery (CRS) with and without Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy (HIPEC): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Although several studies have been completed to investigate the effect of cytoreductive surgery (CRS) with or without hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in endometrial cancer with peritoneal metastasis (ECPM), a direct comparison was not performed previously. A meta-analysis was performed to investigate the suspected additional survival benefits of CRS plus HIPEC over CRS only. Twenty-one and ten studies with a total number of 1116 and 152 cases investigating CRS only and CRS plus HIPEC were identified, respectively. When all articles were analyzed, the 1-year survival rate was 17.60% higher for CRS plus HIPEC (82.28% vs. 64.68%; p = 0.0102). The same tendency was observed for the 2-year (56.07% vs. 36.95%; difference: 19.12%; p = 0.0014), but not for the 5-year (21.88% vs. 16.45%; difference: 5.43%; p = 0.3918) survival rates. The same clinical significance, but statistically less strong observations, could be made if only the studies published after 2010 were investigated (1-year survival rate: 12.08% and p = 0.0648; 2-year survival rate: 10.90% and p = 0.0988). CRS remains one of the core elements of ECPM treatment, but the addition of HIPEC to CRS can increase the positive clinical outcome, especially in the first 2 years.

Effect of quality control program on surgical management in advanced ovarian cancer.

OBJECTIVE: We investigated the effect of our quality control (QC) program on the management strategy, completeness of the surgery, and clinical outcomes in advanced ovarian cancer. METHODS: A retrospective review of medical records from January 2005 to December 2019 identified 129 patients with advanced ovarian cancer. Cases were categorized into group 1 (2005-2013) and group 2 (2014-2019) before and after implementation of the QC program. Comparisons included clinicopathological variables, operative details, recurrence and survival outcomes. RESULTS: In Group 2 (n=44), after QC program implementation, primary debulking surgery (PDS) decreased (87.1% vs. 63.6%) and interval debulking surgery (IDS) increased (12.9% vs. 36.4%), indicating a shift in surgical strategy. Optimal resection rates improved significantly for PDS in group 2 (50.0% to 75.0%, p=0.007) and remained high for IDS in both groups (81.8% vs. 81.3%, p>0.999). Post-QC, advanced debulking procedures and co-operation with other departments increased in the IDS (p<0.05). Intra/post-operative complication rates were statistically comparable (p>0.05), whereas postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter in group 2 (17 days vs. 22 days, p=0.001). Median recurrence-free survival increased after QC, although not statistically significant (19.18 months vs. 25.38 months, p=0.855). CONCLUSION: With QC program, treatment strategies and clinical outcomes were significantly improved in advanced ovarian cancer. Systematic QC monitoring program should be considered as routine surveillance for better surgical outcomes.

Expert consensus: Profiling and management of advanced or metastatic epithelial ovarian cancer / Consenso de expertos basado en la evidencia: perfilamiento y manejo del carcinoma epitelial de ovario de alto grado avanzado.

Introduction and objective: The approach to patients with advanced or metastatic high-grade epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) has evolved over time with the advent of new therapies and multimodal strategies. The objective of this consensus of experts is to generate national recommendations for the profiling and management of advanced or metastatic high-grade OEC, defined as stages III and IV of the "The International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) classification at the time of diagnosis to base on the literature review that included international evidence-based clinical practice guidelines (CPG). Material and methods: Eleven panelists (oncologists and gynecological oncologists) answered 8 questions about the profiling and management of advanced or metastatic ovarian epithelial carcinoma. The panelists were chosen for their academic profile and influence in national health institutions. Guidelines from the "ESMO Standardized Operating Procedures Consensus Conference" were used to develop the consensus. It was agreed that the level of agreement to accept a recommendation should be ≥ 80%. The document was peer reviewed. Results: Eight general recommendations are made, which are presented into five domains. Some of these recommendations are subdivided into specific recommendations. Initial treatment Recommendation 1.1 Complete primary cytoreduction (PCS) surgery is suggested as the initial therapy of choice for patients with high-grade or metastatic EOC, which should ideally be carried out in centers with experience, followed by adjuvant therapy. 1.2 Neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by interval cytoreduction surgery (ICS) is suggested in those who are unlikely to achieve a complete cytoreduction in PCS either due to unresectable metastatic disease or who present unresectability criteria (imaging, laparoscopic and/or by laparotomy) and that have been defined by a gynecological oncologist and patients with poor functional status and comorbidities according to the criteria of the multidisciplinary team (clinical oncology, gynecological oncology, radiology, etc.). Recommendation 2. In patients with high-grade epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC), in stage III locally advanced or metastatic, who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy and achieved a complete or partial response (cytoreduction with tumor residue < 2.5 mm), the use of Hyperthermic IntraPeritoneal Chemotherapy (HIPEC) could be considered as an alternative to standard platinum-based adjuvant intravenous chemotherapy during interval cytoreductive surgery, after discussion in a multidisciplinary tumor board, at a center experienced in treating this type of patients. Use of genetic testing. Recommendation 3. It is suggested at the time of diagnosis to offer molecular genetic testing to all patients with high-grade advanced or metastatic EOC regardless of family history. Recommendation 4. It is suggested to offer genetic counseling, by qualified personnel, to all patients with high-grade advanced or metastatic EOC who are ordered genetic testing. Recommendation 5. It is suggested that all patients with advanced or metastatic high-grade EOC undergo a germ panel that includes the Breast Cancer Susceptibility Genes 1/2 genes (BRCA 1/2) and the other susceptibility genes according to with institutional protocols and the availability of genetic testing panels; If it is negative, then somatic testing should be performed that includes the homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) status, regardless of family history. Adjuvant Therapy Recommendation 6. 6.1. It is suggested that all patients with advanced stage III/IV EOC, with PSC of (0-2), got adjuvant intravenous chemotherapy as standard treatment within six weeks after Prc. It is suggested paclitaxel/carboplatin. Recommendation 6.2. It is suggested to use standard chemotherapy base on platinum plus Bevacizumab as adjuvant chemotherapy to patients with high-risk disease (EOC stage IV or stage III with suboptimal tumor cytoreduction), following by bevacizumab as maintenance. The use of bevacizumab as maintenance therapy is not recommended if bevacizumab was not included in the first line of treatment. We suggested the dose used in GOG-0218 and ICON7 trials. Recommendation 6.3 It is suggested combined intravenous/intraperitoneal chemotherapy only for selected patients, with optimal cytoreduction (residual lesions < 1 cm), especially those without residual disease (R0) and who are evaluated in a multidisciplinary meeting. It is not considered standard treatment. Recommendation 6.4. 6.4.1 It is suggested to use Poly ADP ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors such as olaparib or niraparib as maintenance after receiving first-line chemotherapy in patients with stage III/IV BRCA1/2 positive EOC who received platinumbased chemotherapy and obtained complete response/partial response (CR/PR), 6.4.2 It is suggested to use olaparib alone or in combination with bevacizumab or niraparib in patients with stage III/IV BRCA1/2 positive EOC who received platinum-based chemotherapy plus bevacizumab and achieved CR/PR. 6.4.3 It is suggested to use niraparibin patients with stage III/IV BRCA1/2 negative or unknown EOC who received platinum-based chemotherapy and achieved CR/PR. 6.4.4 It is suggested to use bevacizumab or olaparib plus bevacizumab in patients with EOC stage III/IV BRCA1/2 negative or unknown (HRD positive) who received platinum-based chemotherapy plus bevacizumab and obtained CR/PR. Treatment of disease relapse Recommendation 7. Secondary cytoreductive surgery followed by chemotherapy is suggested for selected patients with high-grade advanced EOC in first relapse, platinum-sensitive (platinum-free interval ≥ 6 months), positive "Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynäkologische Onkologie ­ AGO" score or "I-model" positive (< 4.7) with a potential resection to R0 in centers with access to optimal surgical and postoperative support. Note: Platinum-free interval and AGO score have only been developed as positive predictors of complete resection and not to exclude patients from surgery. Recommendation 8. 8.1 For patients with relapse advanced high-grade EOC platinum-sensitive, the following is suggested: Platinum-based combination chemotherapy: carboplatin/liposomal doxorubicin or carboplatin/paclitaxel or carboplatin/nab-paclitaxel or carboplatin/docetaxel or carboplatin/gemcitabine) for six cycles. If combination therapy is not tolerated, give carboplatin or cisplatin alone. Combination chemotherapy (carboplatin/gemcitabine or carboplatin/paclitaxel or carboplatin/doxorubicin liposomal) plus bevacizumab followed by bevacizumab as maintenance (until progression or toxicity). Recommendation 8.2 For patients with relapsed advanced high-grade EOC platinum-resistant, it is suggested: Sequential treatment with chemotherapy, preferably with a non-platinum single agent (weekly paclitaxel or pegylated liposomal doxorubicin or docetaxel or oral etoposide or gemcitabine or trabectidine or, topotecan). Weekly paclitaxel or pegylated liposomal doxorubicin or topotecan could be administrate with or without bevacizumab. Other agents are considered potentially active (capecitabine, cyclophosphamide, ifosfamide, irinotecan, oxaliplatin, pemetrexed, vinorelbine, cyclophosphamide) could be recommended for later lines. Hormone receptor-positive patients who do not tolerate or have no response to cytotoxic regimens may receive hormone therapy with tamoxifen or other agents, including aromatase inhibitors (anastrozole and letrozole) or leuprolide acetate, or megestrol acetate. Patients with a performance score ≥ 3 should be considered only for best supportive care. Recommendation 8.3 Maintenance therapy with PARP inhibitors: It is suggested in patients with relapse advanced high-grade EOC stage III/IV BRCA1/2 (positive, negative or unknown) who have received two or more lines of platinum-based chemotherapy and have achieved CR/PR, use olaparib, niraparib or rucaparib. Niraparib could be useful in BRCA 1/2 +/-/unknown patients, as rucaparib, however, the latter does not yet have approval from the regulatory office in Colombia. Conclusions: It is expected that the recommendations issued in this consensus will contribute to improving clinical care, oncological impact, and quality of life of these women.

Introducción y objetivo: el abordaje de pacientes con cáncer epitelial de ovario (CEO) de alto grado avanzado o metastásico ha ido evolucionando a través del tiempo con el advenimiento de nuevas terapias y estrategias multimodales. El objetivo de este consenso de expertos es generar recomendaciones nacionales para el perfilamiento y manejo del CEO de alto grado avanzado o metastásico, definido como estadios III y IV de la clasificación de la Federación Internacional de Ginecología y Obstetricia (FIGO) al momento del diagnóstico, a partir de la revisión de la literatura que incluyó guías de práctica clínica (GPC) internacionales basadas en la evidencia. Materiales y métodos: once panelistas (oncólogos y ginecólogos oncólogos) respondieron ocho preguntas sobre el perfilamiento y manejo del carcinoma epitelial de ovario avanzado o metastásico. Los panelistas fueron escogidos por su perfil académico e influencia en instituciones de salud nacionales. Para el desarrollo del consenso se utilizaron los lineamientos de la "Conferencia de consenso de procedimientos operativos estandarizados de ESMO". Se definió que el nivel de acuerdo para aceptar una recomendación debía ser ≥ 80%. El documento fue revisado por pares. Resultados: Se hacen 8 recomendaciones generales, presentadas en cinco dominios; algunas de ellas se subdividen en recomendaciones específicas. Tratamiento inicial Recomendación 1 1.1. Como terapia inicial de elección para pacientes con CEO de alto grado o metastásico se sugiere la cirugía de citorreducción primaria (Cpr) completa que, idealmente, debe realizarse en centros con experiencia, seguida de terapia adyuvante. 1.2. Se sugiere quimioterapia neoadyuvante seguida de cirugía de citorreducción de intervalo (Cint) en quienes sea improbable alcanzar una citorreducción completa en la Cpr, bien sea por enfermedad metastásica no resecable o que presenten criterios de irresecabilidad (imagenológicos, laparoscópicos o por laparotomía) que hayan sido definidos por un ginecólogo oncólogo. También en pacientes con un pobre estado funcional y comorbilidades de acuerdo con el criterio del equipo multidisciplinario (oncología clínica, ginecología oncológica, radiología, etc.). Recomendación 2. En pacientes con CEO de alto grado, en estadio III localmente avanzado o metastásico, que recibieron quimioterapia neoadyuvante y alcanzaron respuesta completa o parcial (citorreducción con residuo tumoral < 2,5 mm), se podría evaluar el uso de la quimioterapia intraperitoneal hipertérmica (Hyperthermic IntraPeritoneal Chemotherapy - HIPEC) como alternativa a la quimioterapia IV adyuvante estándar basada en platinos durante la Cint, previa discusión en junta multidisciplinaria, en un centro de experiencia en este tipo de pacientes. Uso de pruebas genéticas Recomendación 3. Al momento del diagnóstico, se sugiere ofrecer testeo molecular genético a toda paciente con CEO de alto grado avanzado o metastásico, independientemente de la historia familiar. Recomendación 4. Se sugiere ofrecer asesoramiento genético, por parte de personal calificado, a toda paciente con CEO de alto grado avanzado o metastásico a quien se le ordene un testeo genético. Recomendación 5. Se sugiere que a toda paciente con CEO de alto grado avanzado o metastásico se le realice panel germinal que incluya los genes de susceptibilidad al cáncer de mama 1/2 (BRCA 1/2) y los otros genes de susceptibilidad de acuerdo con los protocolos institucionales y la disponibilidad de paneles de testeo genético; si es negativo entonces se debería realizar testeo somático que incluya el estatus de deficiencia de la recombinación homóloga (homologous recombination deficiency - HRD), independientemente de la historia familiar. Terapia adyuvante Recomendación 6 6.1. Se sugiere que a toda paciente con CEO estadios III/IV avanzado o metastásico, con estatus de desempeño (performance score care - PSC) de 0-2 se le administre como tratamiento estándar quimioterapia intravenosa (IV) adyuvante dentro de las seis semanas posteriores a la Cpr. Se sugiere administrar paclitaxel/carboplatino. 6.2. Se sugiere utilizar quimioterapia estándar basada en platino más bevacizumab como adyuvancia en pacientes con enfermedad de alto riesgo (CEO estadios IV o III con citorreducción tumoral subóptima), continuando con bevacizumab como mantenimiento. No se recomienda el uso de bevacizumab como terapia de mantenimiento si no se incluyó en la primera línea de tratamiento. Se sugiere seguir los esquemas de los estudios Gynecologic Oncology Group Study (GOG-0218) e International Collaborative Ovarian Neoplasm (ICON7). 6.3. Se sugiere la quimioterapia combinada IV/intraperitoneal (IP) solo para pacientes seleccionadas, con una citorreducción óptima (lesiones residuales < 1 cm), en especial aquellas sin enfermedad residual (R0) y que sean evaluadas en junta multidisciplinaria. La quimioterapia combinada IV/IP no se considera como tratamiento estándar. 6.4. 6.4.1. Se sugiere utilizar inhibidores de poli(ADP-ribosa) polimerasa (PARP) tales como olaparib o niraparib como mantenimiento después de recibir una primera línea de quimioterapia en pacientes con CEO estadios III/IV BRCA1/2 positivo que recibieron quimioterapia basada en platino y obtuvieron respuesta completa/respuesta parcial (RC/RP). 6.4.2. Se sugiere utilizar olaparib solo o en combinación con bevacizumab o niraparib en pacientes con CEO estadios III/IV BRCA1/2 positivo que recibieron quimioterapia basada en platino más bevacizumab y obtuvieron RC/RP. 6.4.3. Se sugiere utilizar niraparib en pacientes con CEO estadio III/IV BRCA1/2 negativo o desconocido que recibieron quimioterapia basada en platino y obtuvieron RC/RP. 6.4.4. Se sugiere utilizar bevacizumab u olaparib más bevacizumab en pacientes con CEO estadios III/IV BRCA1/2 negativo o desconocido (HRD positivo) que recibieron quimioterapia basada en platino más bevacizumab y obtuvieron RC/RP. Tratamiento de la recaída de la enfermedad Recomendación 7. Se sugiere la realización de la cirugía de citorreducción secundaria (Csec), seguida de quimioterapia, a pacientes seleccionadas con CEO de alto grado avanzado o metastásico en primera recaída, platino-sensibles (intervalo libre de platinos ≥ 6 meses), puntuación Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynäkologische Onkologie (AGO) positiva o Integrate model (I-Model) positivo (< 4,7), y con una potencial resección a R0, en centros con acceso a soporte quirúrgico y posoperatorio óptimo. Nota: el intervalo libre de tratamiento con platinos y la puntuación AGO solo se han desarrollado como predictores positivos de resección completa y no para excluir a las pacientes de la cirugía. Recomendación 8 8.1. Para pacientes con CEO de alto grado avanzado o metastásico en recaída platino-sensibles se sugiere: Quimioterapia combinada basada en platino: carboplatino/doxorrubicina liposomal o carboplatino/paclitaxel o carboplatino/ nab-paclitaxel o carboplatino/docetaxel o carboplatino/gemcitabina, por seis ciclos. Si no se tolera la terapia combinada, dar carboplatino o cisplatino solo. Quimioterapia combinada: carboplatino/gemcitabina o carboplatino/paclitaxel o carboplatino/doxorubicina liposomal, más bevacizumab, seguida de bevacizumab como mantenimiento (hasta progresión o toxicidad). 8.2. Para pacientes con CEO de alto grado avanzado o metastásico en recaída, platino-resistentes, se sugiere: Tratamiento secuencial con quimioterapia, preferiblemente con un agente único que no sea un platino (paclitaxel semanal o doxorrubicina liposomal pegilada o docetaxel o etopósido oral o gemcitabina o trabectidina o topotecan). El paclitaxel semanal o la doxorrubicina liposomal pegilada o el topotecan pueden ser administrados con o sin bevacizumab. Existen otros agentes que se consideran potencialmente act ivos (capecitabina, ciclofosfamida, ifosfamida, irinotecán, oxaliplatino, pemetrexed, vinorelbina, ciclofosfamida), que se podrían recomendar para líneas posteriores. Las pacientes con receptores hormonales positivos que no toleran o no tienen respuesta a los regímenes citotóxicos pueden recibir terapia hormonal con tamoxifeno u otros agentes, incluidos los inhibidores de la aromatasa (anastrozol y letrozol) o acetato de leuprolide o acetato de megestrol. Pacientes con PSC ≥ 3 deberían ser consideradas solo para el mejor cuidado de soporte. 8.3. Terapia de mantenimiento con inhibidores PARP. Para pacientes con CEO de alto grado avanzado o metastásico en recaída estadios III/IV BRCA1/2 (positivo, negativo o desconocido), que hayan recibido dos o más líneas de quimioterapia basada en platino y hayan alcanzado RC/RP, se sugiere utilizar olaparib, niraparib o rucaparib. El niraparib podría ser útil en pacientes BRCA 1/2 +/-/desconocido, al igual que el rucaparib, sin embargo, este último no tiene aún aprobación del ente regulador en Colombia. Conclusiones: se espera que las recomendaciones emitidas en este consenso contribuyan a mejorar la atención clínica, el impacto oncológico y la calidad de vida de estas mujeres.

Optimizing patient selection for secondary cytoreductive surgery in recurrent endometrial cancer.

OBJECTIVE: This retrospective, multicenter, observational study aimed to refine patient selection criteria for secondary cytoreductive surgery in recurrent endometrial cancer. The objective was to identify preoperative predictors of complete cytoreduction, assess surgical complexity, and propose a preoperative predictive scoring system to identify suitable candidates for secondary cytoreductive surgery. METHODS: Data from 331 women with recurrent endometrial cancer were analyzed across three Italian centers from January 2010 to December 2021. Patients were categorized based on treatment received (medical treatment, diagnostic laparoscopy/examination under anesthesia, or secondary cytoreductive surgery). Preoperative predictors, surgical complexity, complications, and a predictive scoring system were assessed. Logistic regression and receiver operating characteristic analysis were used for statistical evaluation. RESULTS: Of the cohort, 56.2% underwent debulking surgery, 17.2% had diagnostic laparoscopy, and 26.6% received medical treatment. Patients undergoing secondary cytoreductive surgery were younger, with a lower body mass index, better performance status, and fewer comorbidities. Single site locoregional relapse was common in secondary cytoreductive surgery patients. Age <65 years, single site relapse, lymph node, and hematogenous relapse were independent predictors of complete cytoreduction. A predictive scoring system demonstrated a clear relationship between the score and the likelihood of complete cytoreduction. CONCLUSION: This study identified age <65 years, single site recurrence, as well as nodal and hematogenous recurrence, as predictive factors for achieving optimal cytoreduction. A predictive scoring system incorporating these factors has been proposed to identify optimal candidates for secondary cytoreductive surgery in recurrent endometrial cancer. The scoring system showed promising predictive accuracy and could aid in refining the decision making process, ensuring appropriate patient selection for secondary cytoreductive surgery. Further prospective studies are warranted to validate and enhance the predictive model.

Multidisciplinary systemic and local therapies for metastatic renal cell carcinoma: a narrative review.

INTRODUCTION: Systemic and local therapies for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) are often challenging despite the evolution of multimodal cancer therapies in the last decade. In this review, we will focus on recent multidisciplinary approaches for patients with mRCC. AREAS COVERED: Systemic therapies for patients with mRCC have been garnering attention particularly after the approval of immuno-oncology (IO) agents, including anti-programmed death 1/programmed death-ligand 1. IO combinations have significantly prolonged overall survival in patients with mRCC in the first-line setting. Regarding local therapies, cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN) has become less common in the post-Cancer du Rein Metastatique Nephrectomie et Antiangiogéniques (CARMENA) trial era, even though CN may still benefit selected patients with mRCC. In addition, metastasis-directed local therapies, namely metastasectomy or stereotactic radiotherapy, particularly for oligo-metastatic lesions or brain metastases, may have a prognostic impact. Several ablative techniques are also evolving while maintaining high local control rates with acceptable safety. EXPERT OPINION: Multimodal cancer therapies are essential for conquering complex cases of mRCC. Modern systemic therapies including IO-based combination therapy as well as local therapies including CN, metastasectomy, stereotactic radiotherapy, and ablative techniques appear to improve oncologic outcomes of patients with mRCC, although appropriate patient selection is indispensable.

Comprehensive characterization of genomic features and clinical outcomes following targeted therapy and secondary cytoreductive surgery in OCCC: a single center experience.

OBJECTIVE: Ovarian clear cell carcinoma (OCCC) is associated with chemoresistance. Limited data exists regarding the efficacy of targeted therapies such as immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) and bevacizumab, and the role of secondary cytoreductive surgery (SCS). METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed genomic features and treatment outcomes of 172 OCCC patients treated at our institution from January 2000 to May 2022. Next-generation sequencing (NGS) was performed where sufficient archival tissue was available. RESULTS: 64.0% of patients were diagnosed at an early stage, and 36.0% at an advanced stage. Patients with advanced/relapsed OCCC who received platinum-based chemotherapy plus bevacizumab followed by maintenance bevacizumab had a median first-line progression-free survival (PFS) of 12.2 months, compared with 9.3 months for chemotherapy alone (hazard ratio=0.69; 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.33, 1.45). In 27 patients who received an ICI, the overall response rate was 18.5% and median duration of response was 7.4 months (95% CI=6.5, 8.3). In 17 carefully selected patients with fewer than 3 sites of relapse, median PFS was 35 months (95% CI=0, 73.5) and median overall survival was 96.8 months (95% CI=44.6, 149.0) after SCS. NGS on 58 tumors revealed common mutations in ARID1A (48.3%), PIK3CA (46.6%), and KRAS (20.7%). Pathogenic alterations in PIK3CA, FGFR2, and NBN were associated with worse survival outcomes. Median tumor mutational burden was 3.78 (range, 0-16). All 26 patients with available loss of heterozygosity (LOH) scores had LOH <16%. CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrates encouraging outcomes with bevacizumab and ICI, and SCS in select relapsed OCCC patients. Prospective trials are warranted.

Peritoneal metastases from rare ovarian cancer treated with cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS/HIPEC).

Objectives: There are limited treatment options and no consensus on the management of advanced rare ovarian malignancies. Rare ovarian malignancies can present with peritoneal metastases (PM), featuring a similar presentation to more common ovarian subtypes. Cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS/HIPEC) is an effective treatment for PM of non-gynecologic origin and, recently, epithelial ovarian cancer. We evaluated the feasibility of CRS/HIPEC in the management of PM from rare ovarian malignancies and report postoperative outcomes on these patients. Methods: A retrospective review of a single center, prospective database (1994-2021) was performed to identify patients with rare ovarian malignancies treated with CRS/HIPEC. Clavien-Dindo 90-day morbidity/mortality and Kaplan-Meier overall (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were analyzed. Results: Of 44 patients identified, 28 underwent CRS/HIPEC. Six were aborted due to extensive disease. Histologic subtypes included: clear cell (5/28, 17.9 %), endometrioid (5/28, 17.9 %), granulosa cell (3/28, 10.7 %), low-grade serous (6/28, 21.4 %), mesonephric (1/28, 3.6 %), mucinous (6/28, 21.4 %), and small cell (2/28, 7.1 %) carcinomas. Eight (28.6 %) patients had primary and 20 (71.4 %) had recurrent disease. Median peritoneal cancer index (PCI) was 21 (IQR: 6-29). Complete cytoreduction (<2.5 mm residual disease) was achieved in 27/28 (96.4 %). Grade III/IV complications occurred in 9/28 (32.1 %) with one (3.6 %) mortality. After a median follow-up of 65.8 months, 20 patients were alive. Five-year OS and PFS were 68.5 and 52.6 %, respectively. Conclusions: In patients with PM from rare ovarian malignancies, CRS/HIPEC is feasible and has an acceptable safety profile. Longer follow-up and multicenter trials are needed.

MIRRORS: a prospective cohort study assessing the feasibility of robotic interval debulking surgery for advanced-stage ovarian cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To establish the feasibility and safety of robotic interval debulking surgery following the MIRRORS protocol (robot-assisted laparoscopic assessment prior to robotic or open surgery) in women with advanced-stage ovarian cancer. MIRRORS is the first of three planned trials: MIRRORS, MIRRORS-RCT (pilot), and MIRRORS-RCT. METHODS: The participants were patients with stage IIIc-IVb epithelial ovarian cancer undergoing neo-adjuvant chemotherapy, suitable for interval debulking surgery with a pelvic mass ≤8 cm. The intervention was robot-assisted laparoscopic assessment prior to robotic or open interval debulking surgery (MIRRORS protocol). The primary outcome was feasibility of recruitment, and the secondary outcomes were quality of life (EORTC QLQC30/OV28, HADS questionnaires), pain, surgical complications, complete cytoreduction rate (%), conversion to open surgery (%), and overall and progression-free survival at 1 year. RESULTS: Overall, 95.8% (23/24) of patients who were eligible were recruited. Median age was 68 years (range 53-83). All patients had high grade serous histology and were BRCA negative. In total, 56.5% were stage IV, 43.5% were stage III, 87.0% had a partial response, while 13.0% had stable disease by RECIST 1.1. Median peritoneal cancer index was 24 (range 6-38). Following MIRRORS protocol, 87.0% (20/23) underwent robotic interval debulking surgery, and 13.0% (3/23) had open surgery. All patients achieved R<1 (robotic R0=47.4%, open R0=0%). No patients had conversion to open. Median estimated blood loss was 50 mL for robotic (range 20-500 mL), 2026 mL for open (range 2000-2800 mL) (p=0.001). Median intensive care length of stay was 0 days for robotic (range 0-8) and 3 days (range 3-13) for MIRRORS Open (p=0.012). The median length of stay was 1.5 days for robotic (range 1-17), 6 days for open (range 5-41) (p=0.012). The time to chemotherapy was as follows 18.5 days for robotic (range 13-28), 25 days for open (range 22-28) (p=0.139). CONCLUSIONS: Robotic interval debulking surgery appears safe and feasible for experienced robotic surgeons in patients with a pelvic mass ≤8 cm. A randomized controlled trial (MIRRORS-RCT) will determine whether MIRRORS protocol has non-inferior survival (overall and progression-free) compared with open interval debulking surgery.

Role of fertility-sparing surgery and further prognostic factors in borderline tumors of the ovary.

OBJECTIVE: Borderline tumors of the ovary are a rare group of ovarian neoplasms with distinctive histological features. Considering their favorable prognosis and occurrence at a younger age, fertility-sparing surgery may be considered. Several risk factors have been identified as contributing to a higher recurrence rate, while the impact of pathohistological features varies in the literature. This study aimed to analyze risk factors for recurrence in patients with borderline tumors of the ovary. METHODS: Analysis included patients treated with first diagnosis of a borderline tumor at our center between January 1997 and December 2022 to analyze disease-free survival and to identify the role of fertility-sparing surgery, defined as preservation of at least one ovary, pathohistological features, and other prognostic factors for relapse. All stages classified according to the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) were included. RESULTS: Among 507 patients, 26 patients (5.2%) had a recurrence, with 21 (4.1%) showing borderline histology and 5 (1%) with invasive relapses. Recurrence rate was higher following fertility-sparing surgery (p<0.0001). Median follow-up period was 49.2 (range 42.0-57.6) months. Among 153 patients (30.2%) who had fertility-sparing surgery, 21 (13.7%) experienced a recurrence (including one invasive relapse). Fertility-sparing surgery (HR 20; 95% CI 6.9 to 60; p<0.001), FIGO stage I with bilateral presence of tumor (HR 6.4; 95% CI 1.3 to 31; p=0.020), FIGO stage II (HR 15; 95% CI 3.4 to 68; p<0.001), FIGO stages III-IV (HR 38; 95% CI 10 to 140; p<0.001) in comparison with FIGO stage I with unilateral tumor, microinvasion (HR 8.6; 95% CI 2.7 to 28; p<0.001), and micropapillary growth patterns (HR 4.4; 95% CI 1.8 to 10; p=0.001) were identified as independent risk factors for recurrence in multivariate analysis. None of these factors were associated with an increased risk of disease-related death. CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed that although a fertility-preserving approach is associated with increased recurrence rates of a borderline tumor, it does not affect overall survival and can therefore be regarded as oncologically safe for patients desiring to preserve fertility. Additionally, presence of micropapillary patterns and microinvasion were identified as prognostic risk factors.

Prognostic value of molecular classification in stage IV endometrial cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Multiple studies have proven the prognostic value of molecular classification for stage I-III endometrial cancer patients. However, studies on the relevance of molecular classification for stage IV endometrial cancer patients are lacking. Hypothetically, poor prognostic molecular subtypes are more common in higher stages of endometrial cancer. Considering the poor prognosis of stage IV endometrial cancer patients, it is questionable whether molecular classification has additional prognostic value. Therefore, we determined which molecular subclasses are found in stage IV endometrial cancer and if there is a correlation with progression-free and overall survival. METHODS: A retrospective multicenter cohort study was conducted using data from five Dutch hospitals. Patients with stage IV endometrial cancer at diagnosis who were treated with primary cytoreductive surgery or cytoreductive surgery after induction chemotherapy between January 2000 and December 2018 were included. Exclusion criteria were age <18 years or recurrent disease. The molecular classification was performed centrally on all tumor samples according to the World Health Organization 2020 classification (including POLE and estrogen receptor status). The Kaplan-Meier method was used to calculate progression free and overall survival in the molecular subclasses, for the different histological subtypes and for estrogen receptor positive versus estrogen receptor negative tumors. Groups were compared using the log-rank test. RESULTS: 164 stage IV endometrial cancer patients were molecularly classified. Median age of the patients was 67 years (range 33-86). Most patients presented with a non-endometrioid histological subtype (58%). Intra-abdominal complete cytoreductive surgery was achieved in 60.4% of the patients. 101 tumors (61.6%) were classified as p53 abnormal, 35 (21.3%) as no specific molecular profile, 21 (12.8%) as mismatch repair deficient, and 6 (3%) as POLE mutated. Molecular classification had no significant impact on progression free (p=0.056) or overall survival (p=0.12) after cytoreductive surgery. Overall survival was affected by histologic subtype (p<0.0001) and estrogen receptor status (p=0.013). CONCLUSION: The distribution of the molecular subclasses in stage IV endometrial cancer patients differed substantially from the distribution in stage I-III endometrial cancer patients, with the unfavorable subclasses being more frequently present. Although the molecular classification was not prognostic in stage IV endometrial cancer, it could guide adjuvant treatment decisions.

Primary cytoreductive surgery compared with neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with BRCA mutated advanced high grade serous ovarian cancer: 10 year survival analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Given the high response to platinum based chemotherapy in BRCA 1/2 mutated high grade serous ovarian cancers, there is uncertainty about the relative benefits of primary cytoreductive surgery versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy in this population. We aimed to compare the survival outcomes for women with BRCA 1/2 mutated high grade serous ovarian cancers undergoing either primary cytoreductive surgery or neoadjuvant chemotherapy. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of all stage III/IV BRCA mutated high grade serous ovarian cancers treated with primary cytoreductive surgery or neoadjuvant chemotherapy at a single tertiary cancer center between 1991 and 2020. Baseline demographics, initial disease burden, surgical complexity, and survival outcomes were examined. RESULTS: Of 314 women with germline or somatic BRCA mutations, 194 (62%) underwent primary cytoreductive surgery and 120 (38%) underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by interval cytoreductive surgery. Those undergoing primary cytoreductive surgery were younger (median age 53 years (range 47-59) vs 59 years (50-65), p<0.001), but there were no differences in functional status or underlying comorbidities. The initial disease burden was lower (disease score high (40% vs 44%; p<0.001) but surgical complexity was higher (surgical complexity score high (18% vs 3%; p<0.001) in the primary cytoreductive surgery cohort. The rate of optimal or complete cytoreduction was similar in both groups (89% vs 90%; p=0.23) as well as the rate of poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor use (62% vs 68%; p=0.3). The 10 year overall survival and recurrence free survival were superior in the primary cytoreductive surgery cohort (overall survival 49% vs 25%, p<0.001 and progression free survival 25% vs 10%, p<0.001). After controlling for confounders, primary cytoreductive surgery remained a significant predictor of improved overall survival (hazard ratio (HR) 0.45; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.27 to 0.74; p=0.002) and recurrence free survival (HR 0.55; 95% CI 0.37 to 0.80; p=0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Primary cytoreductive surgery was associated with improved survival in women with stage III/IV BRCA mutated high grade serous ovarian cancers compared with neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

An international worldwide retrospective cohort observational study comparing primary cytoreductive surgery with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and interval cytoreductive surgery in patients with carcinoma of the ovary, fallopian tubes, and peritoneum (SUROVA trial).

BACKGROUND: Currently, a lively debate exists within the scientific community regarding the most suitable procedure for treating stages IIIB-IVB carcinoma of the ovary, fallopian tubes, and peritoneum. The options under most consideration are primary cytoreductive surgery or neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by interval cytoreductive surgery. PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: To compare overall survival at 5 years in patients who underwent primary cytoreductive surgery versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy and interval cytoreductive surgery for stage IIIB-IVB ovarian cancer STUDY HYPOTHESIS: The treatment with primary cytoreductive surgery results in superior patient survival compared with neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by interval cytoreductive surgery. TRIAL DESIGN: This is a multicenter, retrospective cohort observational study. Data will be collected from patients undergoing surgery in hospitals worldwide. Two arms will be compared: primary cytoreductive surgery and neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by interval cytoreductive surgery. MAJOR INCLUSION/EXCLUSION CRITERIA: Patients must have suspected or histologically confirmed International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stages IIIB-IVB ovarian, peritoneal, or fallopian tube cancers. They must have undergone primary surgery or first course of neoadjuvant chemotherapy between January 1, 2018 and December 31, 2019. Based on all available information before the surgery (primary or interval), the patient must have been considered completely resectable. PRIMARY ENDPOINT: Overall survival at 5 years from the first treatment (chemotherapy in the case of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and cytoreduction in the case of primary cytoreductive surgery). SAMPLE SIZE: An estimated total of 5000 patients will be enrolled in the study. ESTIMATED DATES FOR COMPLETING ACCRUAL AND PRESENTING RESULTS: March 2025 TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT06223763.

Extra-abdominal cytoreductive techniques in ovarian cancer: how far can (should) we go?

Complex surgery is an essential component in the management of advanced ovarian cancer. Furthermore, achieving complete gross resection in cytoreductive surgery appears to be associated with significant survival benefits in patients with advanced ovarian cancer. The goal of this review is to demonstrate the advancement of surgical techniques in gynecologic oncology surgery, including resection of disease within the intrathoracic and inguinal regions. This progress has expanded the option of surgery to more patients, especially those who would have previously been deemed inoperable. In this review we describe the most notable studies and reports of surgical resection of ovarian cancer involving cardiophrenic/supradiaphragmatic lymph nodes, mediastinum, lung pleura or parenchyma, and the inguinal region. We also describe the growing role that video-assisted thoracic surgery has played in advanced ovarian cancer diagnosis and management. The studies, series, and reports described demonstrate that comprehensive surgical procedures outside of the abdomen or pelvis can be both safe and feasible in properly selected patients. They also suggest that resection of disease outside of the abdomen or pelvis may benefit appropriately selected patients. Future studies are necessary to identify which patients may benefit most from upfront surgery versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy when ovarian cancer metastasis is present in the thoracic or inguinal regions.

A computer synoptic operative report versus a report dictated by a surgeon in advanced ovarian cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the role of a computer synoptic operative report in enhancing the quality and completeness of surgical reporting for advanced ovarian cancer surgeries. METHODS: The study was conducted at a tertiary cancer center between January 2016 and September 2021, and the computer synoptic operative report was implemented in May 2019. The study compared two cohorts: the first consisted of the 'before computer synoptic operative report (P1)' period, during which the operative reports were dictated freely by the surgeons, and the second consisted of the 'after computer synoptic operative report (P2)' period, during which all surgeons used the computer synoptic operative report. RESULTS: The study analyzed 227 operative reports, with 104 during period 1 (P1) and 123 during period 2 (P2). In the P1 group, more than half of the patients (54 out of 104, 52%) underwent interval surgery after completing six cycles of chemotherapy; In contrast, in the P2 group, all interval debulking surgeries were performed after fewer than six chemotherapy cycles (p<0.001). Although interval debulking surgery after fewer than six chemotherapy cycles was more frequent in P2, the rate of primary debulking surgery was similar between the groups. The median intra-operative peritoneal carcinomatosis index was higher in P2 (2 in P1 vs 4 in P2, p<0.001), and mean blood loss was higher in P1 (308 mL vs 151 mL, p<0.001). The rate of complete cytoreduction was similar between P1 and P2 (97% vs 87%, respectively, p=0.6). The median length of hospital stay was 12 days in the P1 group and 16 days in the P2 group (p=0.5). Compliance with all eight significant items was higher in the P2 group, with all items present in 66% of the operative reports in the P2 group compared with none of the reports in the P1 group. Compliance for the following items was: International Federation of Obstetrics and Gynecology stage (24% vs 100%), histology (76% vs 97%), CA125 (63% vs 89%), type of surgery (38% vs 100%), peritoneal carcinomatosis index (21% vs 100%), complete cytoreduction score 36% vs 99%), Aletti score (0% vs 89%), and blood loss (32% vs 98%) for P1 and P2; respectively. CONCLUSION: The use of the computer synoptic operative report improved the completeness and quality of the surgical information documented in advanced ovarian cancer surgeries.

Surgical Treatment and Outcome of Ovarian Cancer Patients With Liver Metastases: Experience of a Tertiary Hepatic and Peritoneal Surface Malignancy Center.

BACKGROUND/AIM: The aim of this study was to describe and evaluate the patterns, perioperative outcomes, and survival rates of patients subjected to hepatic resections for ovarian-derived liver metastasis as part of cytoreductive surgery with or without hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). Furthermore, we investigated two subgroups of tumor patterns: hematogenous liver metastasis and infiltrative liver metastatic spread. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted. Patients from a University Tertiary Hepatic and Peritoneal Surface Malignancy Center with primary or recurrent ovarian cancer, who underwent liver resection as part of cytoreductive surgery between January 1992 and December 2022, were included. RESULTS: Data from 35 patients were analyzed. Both median overall survival (OS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) were 24.97 months. In a multivariate setting, the combined effect of age, peritoneal carcinomatosis index, body mass index, hematogenous liver metastasis vs. infiltrative spread types, and HIPEC (HR=0.2372; 95%CI=0.0719-0.7823; p=0.0181) over OS was tested. Survival analysis revealed no differences between the two metastatic spread types (OS: p=0.9720; DSS: p=0.9610). Younger age (p=0.0301), splenectomy (p=0.0320), lesser omentectomy (p=0.0178), and right upper quadrant peritonectomy (p=0.0373) were more characteristic for those patients with infiltrative liver metastatic spread. CONCLUSION: Complete cytoreductive surgery, including hepatic resection is a feasible approach with or without additional HIPEC, which may provide survival benefit for patients with advanced and/or recurrent ovarian cancer. If metastatic and infiltrative liver involvement is suspected, liver-specific imaging is recommended.