Aim: To compare prognosis of advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (AEOC) patients based on where the first surgical assessment was performed. Patients and Methods: Retrospective analysis of primary AEOC patients was performed and three groups were formed based on where the decision of primary treatment was taken: Internal, if the decision was carried out at our Institution (PDS (Primary Debulking Surgery), I-IDS (Internal-Interval Debulking Surgery)) and Referred in case women were referred after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) from other Centers (R-IDS (Referred-Interval Debulking Surgery)). Results: Among 573 AEOC, 279 (48.7%) were PDS and 294 (51.3%) IDS. In particular, 134 of 294 (45.6%) were R-IDS and 160 (54.4%) were I-IDS. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 26 months in PDS, 14 months in I-IDS and 17 months in R-IDS. The difference was statistically significant (p<0.05) among all groups. Conclusion: IDS can represent a suitable approach only when the first complete debulking is not achievable in a tertiary referral hospital.

Vizzielli, G., Fanfani, F., Chiantera, V., Tortorella, L., Lucidi, A., Petrillo, M., Costantini, B., Scambia, G., Fagotti, A., Does the Diagnosis Center Influence the Prognosis of Ovarian Cancer Patients Submitted to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy?, <<ANTICANCER RESEARCH>>, 2015; 35 (5): 3027-3032 [http://hdl.handle.net/10807/70261]

Does the Diagnosis Center Influence the Prognosis of Ovarian Cancer Patients Submitted to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy?

Fanfani, F;Scambia, Giovanni;Fagotti, A.
2015

Abstract

Aim: To compare prognosis of advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (AEOC) patients based on where the first surgical assessment was performed. Patients and Methods: Retrospective analysis of primary AEOC patients was performed and three groups were formed based on where the decision of primary treatment was taken: Internal, if the decision was carried out at our Institution (PDS (Primary Debulking Surgery), I-IDS (Internal-Interval Debulking Surgery)) and Referred in case women were referred after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) from other Centers (R-IDS (Referred-Interval Debulking Surgery)). Results: Among 573 AEOC, 279 (48.7%) were PDS and 294 (51.3%) IDS. In particular, 134 of 294 (45.6%) were R-IDS and 160 (54.4%) were I-IDS. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 26 months in PDS, 14 months in I-IDS and 17 months in R-IDS. The difference was statistically significant (p<0.05) among all groups. Conclusion: IDS can represent a suitable approach only when the first complete debulking is not achievable in a tertiary referral hospital.
Inglese
Vizzielli, G., Fanfani, F., Chiantera, V., Tortorella, L., Lucidi, A., Petrillo, M., Costantini, B., Scambia, G., Fagotti, A., Does the Diagnosis Center Influence the Prognosis of Ovarian Cancer Patients Submitted to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy?, <<ANTICANCER RESEARCH>>, 2015; 35 (5): 3027-3032 [http://hdl.handle.net/10807/70261]
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/10807/70261
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 9
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 8
social impact