Abstract
A total of 251 patients with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) treated between 2002 and 2008 was retrospectively analyzed to investigate the long-term outcomes and prognostic factors of these patients, particularly those who underwent primary debulking surgery followed by platinum-based chemotherapy. Clinicopathological parameters, including progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), were also analyzed. The median follow-up period from the end of initial treatment to June 2010 was 58 months. The three-year PFS rate was 61.7% for International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) I-II, 19.9% for FIGO III-IV, and 33.9% for all stages. By comparison, the five-year PFS rate was 44.6% for FIGO I-II, 17.7% for FIGO III-IV, and 28.3% for all stages. The three-year OS rate was 67.9% for FIGO I-II, 41.7% for FIGO III-IV, and 50.2% for all stages. The five-year OS rate was 52.7% for FIGO I-II, 30.8% for FIGO III-IV, and 39.2% for all stages. Univariate analysis revealed that advanced FIGO stage, serum CA125, and suboptimal debulking were significant factors affecting PFS and OS. In multivariate analysis, PFS was significantly influenced by FIGO stage and suboptimal debulking. However, OS was significantly influenced by advanced FIGO stage only. Our study confirms the efficacy of surgery followed by platinum-based chemotherapy for EOC. FIGO stage is considered as one of the most reliable predictors of the prognosis of patients with EOC.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Siegel R, Naishadham D, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2012. CA Cancer J Clin 2012; 62(1): 10–29
Benedet JL, Bender H, Jones H 3rd, Ngan HY, Pecorelli S. FIGO staging classifications and clinical practice guidelines in the management of gynecologic cancers. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2000; 70(2): 209–262
Morgan RJ Jr, Alvarez RD, Armstrong DK, Burger RA, Castells M, Chen LM, Copeland L, Crispens MA, Gershenson D, Gray H, Hakam A, Havrilesky LJ, Johnston C, Lele S, Martin L, Matulonis UA, O’Malley DM, Penson RT, Remmenga SW, Sabbatini P, Santoso JT, Schilder RJ, Schink J, Teng N, Werner TL, Hughes M, Dwyer MA; National Comprehensive Cancer Network. Ovarian cancer, version 3.2012. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2012;10(11):1339–49
Hennessy BT, Coleman RL, Markman M. Ovarian cancer. Lancet 4 Clinical analysis of 251 cases with EOC 2009; 374(9698): 1371–1382
Jelovac D, Armstrong DK. Recent progress in the diagnosis and treatment of ovarian cancer. CA Cancer J Clin 2011; 61(3): 183–203
International Collaborative Ovarian Neoplasm Group. Paclitaxel plus carboplatin versus standard chemotherapy with either single-agent carboplatin or cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and cisplatin in women with ovarian cancer: the ICON3 randomised trial. Lancet 2002; 360(9332): 505–515
Muggia FM, Braly PS, Brady MF, Sutton G, Niemann TH, Lentz SL, Alvarez RD, Kucera PR, Small JM. Phase III randomized study of cisplatin versus paclitaxel versus cisplatin and paclitaxel in patients with suboptimal stage III or IV ovarian cancer: a gynecologic oncology group study. J Clin Oncol 2000; 18(1): 106–115
Husseinzadeh N. Status of tumor markers in epithelial ovarian cancer has there been any progress? A review. Gynecol Oncol 2011; 120(1): 152–157
Bristow RE, Tomacruz RS, Armstrong DK, Trimble EL, Montz FJ. Survival effect of maximal cytoreductive surgery for advanced ovarian carcinoma during the platinum era: a meta-analysis. J Clin Oncol 2002; 20(5): 1248–1259
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Fu, Y., Wang, X., Pan, Z. et al. Clinical outcomes and prognostic factors of patients with epithelial ovarian cancer subjected to first-line treatment: a retrospective study of 251 cases. Front. Med. 8, 91–95 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11684-014-0305-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11684-014-0305-7