Outcomes of Non-High Grade Serous Carcinoma after Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Advanced-Stage Ovarian Cancer: Single-Institution Experience.
10.3349/ymj.2018.59.8.930
- Author:
Young Shin CHUNG
1
;
Jung Yun LEE
;
Hyun Soo KIM
;
Eun Ji NAM
;
Sang Wun KIM
;
Young Tae KIM
Author Information
1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Institute of Women's Life Medical Science, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. jungyunlee@yuhs.ac
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Ovarian neoplasm;
neoadjuvant therapy;
survival rate;
adenocarcinoma, clear cell;
adenocarcinoma, mucinous
- MeSH:
Adenocarcinoma, Clear Cell;
Adenocarcinoma, Mucinous;
Cancer Care Facilities;
Demography;
Disease-Free Survival;
Drug Therapy*;
Humans;
Multivariate Analysis;
Neoadjuvant Therapy;
Ovarian Neoplasms*;
Retrospective Studies;
Survival Rate
- From:Yonsei Medical Journal
2018;59(8):930-936
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
PURPOSE: Outcomes in patients with ovarian high-grade serous carcinoma (HGSC) treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) have been widely studied; however, there is limited information on responses to chemotherapy among patients with non-HGSC. The aim of this study was to compare the survival outcomes of patients with advanced-stage non-HGSC and HGSC treated with NAC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study was a retrospective analysis of patients with advanced-stage ovarian cancer treated at Yonsei Cancer Hospital between 2006 and 2017. The demographics, chemotherapy response, and survival rates were compared between patients with non-HGSC and those with HGSC. RESULTS: Among 220 patients who underwent NAC, 25 (11.4%) patients had non-HGSC histologic subtypes, and all received a taxane-platinum combination regimen for NAC. Patients with non-HGSC had lower baseline cancer antigen-125 levels (p < 0.001), poorer response rates (p < 0.001), lower rates of optimal cytoreduction (p=0.003), and poorer progression-free survival (PFS) (median PFS 10.3 months vs. 18.3 months; p=0.009) and overall survival (OS) (median OS 25.5 months vs. 60.6 months; p < 0.001), compared to those with HGSC. In multivariate analysis, non-HGSC was a negative prognostic factor for both PFS [hazard ratio (HR), 3.19; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.73–5.88] and OS (HR, 4.22; 95% CI, 2.07–8.58). CONCLUSION: In this study, poorer survival outcomes were observed in patients who underwent NAC for treatment of non-HGSC versus those treated for HGSC. Different treatment strategies are urgently required to improve survival outcomes for patients with non-HGSC undergoing NAC.
