Use and Effectiveness of Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy for Treatment of Ovarian Cancer.

PURPOSE: A 2006 randomized trial demonstrated a 16-month survival benefit with intraperitoneal and intravenous (IP/IV) chemotherapy administered to patients who had ovarian cancer, compared with IV chemotherapy alone, but more treatment-related toxicities. The objective of this study was to examine the use and effectiveness of IP/IV chemotherapy in clinical practice. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Prospective cohort study of 823 women with stage III, optimally cytoreduced ovarian cancer diagnosed at six National Comprehensive Cancer Network institutions. We examined IP/IV chemotherapy use in all patients diagnosed between 2003 and 2012 (N = 823), and overall survival and treatment-related toxicities with Cox regression and logistic regression, respectively, in a propensity score-matched sample (n = 402) of patients diagnosed from 2006 to 2012, excluding trial participants, to minimize selection bias. RESULTS: Use of IP/IV chemotherapy increased from 0% to 33% between 2003 and 2006, increased to 50% from 2007 to 2008, and plateaued thereafter. Between 2006 and 2012, adoption of IP/IV chemotherapy varied by institution from 4% to 67% (P < .001) and 43% of patients received modified IP/IV regimens at treatment initiation. In the propensity score-matched sample, IP/IV chemotherapy was associated with significantly improved overall survival (3-year overall survival, 81% v 71%; hazard ratio, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.47 to 0.99), compared with IV chemotherapy, but also more frequent alterations in chemotherapy delivery route (adjusted rates discontinuation or change, 20.4% v 10.0%; adjusted odds ratio, 2.83; 95% CI, 1.47 to 5.47). CONCLUSION: Although the use of IP/IV chemotherapy increased significantly at National Comprehensive Cancer Network centers between 2003 and 2012, fewer than 50% of eligible patients received it. Increasing IP/IV chemotherapy use in clinical practice may be an important and underused strategy to improve ovarian cancer outcomes.

Evaluation of intervention to prevent hypomagnesemia in cervical cancer patients receiving combination cisplatin and radiation treatment.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of increasing the magnesium (Mg(2+)) supplementation in the pre- and posthydration of patients receiving cisplatin plus radiation (CisXRT) to prevent chemotherapy-induced hypomagnesemia (CIH) events. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was conducted on newly diagnosed cervical cancer patients receiving CisXRT. The first prospective intervention to prevent CIH was to increase the pre- and posthydration Mg(2+) from 1 to 2 g. After completion of the first intervention, the analysis demonstrated the persistent occurrence of CIH on cycle 3, and later, a second intervention was implemented to increase Mg(2+) to 3 g in the pre- and posthydration. Patients that failed to complete at least five cycles or received cisplatin in combination with another chemotherapy regimen were excluded from the study. Baseline group included 70 patients that had received CisXRT prior to any changes in magnesium supplementation. RESULTS: There were 62.8% (44/70) and 32.6% (22/70) of patients with episodes of CIH in the baseline and first intervention groups, respectively (P = 0.007). In the second intervention group, a 49.6% decrease in the total number of episodes compared to control group was observed. Patients in the second intervention group showed a 100% improvement incidence of persistent CIH over the two other cohorts (P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The increase of Mg(2+) to 2 g for the initial two cycles and then to 3 g with the third cycle of CisXRT therapy prevented episodes of CIH and decreased associated treatment delays.

Comparison of treatment tolerance and outcomes in patients with cervical cancer treated with concurrent chemoradiotherapy in a prospective randomized trial or with standard treatment.

PURPOSE: To compare the treatment and outcomes of cervical cancer patients treated with concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CT-RT) in a multi-institutional trial or as standard care. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We reviewed the records of 302 patients treated with CT-RT for locoregionally confined, intact cervical cancer between 1990 and 2005. Of the 302 patients, 76 were treated using cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil (C/F) on Radiation Therapy Oncology Group protocol 90-01 (CT-RT(90-01)); 226 underwent CT-RT as standard care with either C/F [CT-RT(SC(C/F)); n = 115] or weekly cisplatin [CT-RT(SC(WC)); n = 111). RESULTS: The CT-RT(90-01) patients more often had tumors >or=6 cm and were less often diabetic than were the CT-RT(SC) patients. The CT-RT(SC(WC)) patients were more likely than the CT-RT(SC(C/F)) patients to be >or=60 years old or to have Stage III-IV disease. During treatment, CT-RT(SC(C/F)) patients experienced more Grade 2-3 neutropenia and were, therefore, less likely to receive 200 mg/m(2) cisplatin than were either CT-RT(SC(WC)) or CT-RT(90-01) patients (52% vs. 77% vs. 85%, respectively; p <0.001). At 5 years, the disease-specific survival rates were greater for patients treated with C/F [CT-RT(SC(C/F)), 75%; CT-RT(90-01), 79%] than for those treated with CT-RT(SC(WC)) (58%; p = 0.02). On multivariate analysis, C/F chemotherapy, cisplatin dose >or=200 mg/m(2), Stage I-II disease, and negative pelvic lymph nodes were independent predictors of improved disease-specific survival. CONCLUSIONS: Even within a large comprehensive cancer center, the high rates of chemotherapy completion achieved on a multi-institutional trial can be difficult to reproduce in standard practice. Although C/F toxicity was greater in the standard care patients, their outcomes were similar to those of patients treated with C/F on Radiation Therapy Oncology Group protocol 90-01.