Predicting the outcome of cytoreductive surgery in patients with advanced ovarian cancer

   Background. More than 80 % of cases ovarian cancer are detected at stage III–IV. One of the most important predictive factors is the cytoreductive surgery without residual tumor.

   Aim. To determine the selection criteria for cytoreductive surgery in the advanced ovarian cancer patients.

   Materials and methods. The study included 190 primary IIB–IV stage ovarian cancer patients who underwent surgical treatment in the oncogynecological department of the N. N. Petrov NMRC on Oncology in the period from August 2017 to August 2020. All patients underwent pelvic magnetic resonance imaging, chest and abdominal computed tomography, and diagnostic laparoscopy. Assessment of the peritoneal carcinomatosis index (PCI) was performed according to P. Sugarbaker. The outcome of cytoreductive surgery was determined by the size of the residual tumor: complete – without a macroscopically detectable tumor, optimal – residual tumor ≤1 cm, suboptimal – residual tumor ≥1 cm.

   Results. The complete or optimal cytoreduction achieved in 72.6 % of cases (48.9 % (93 / 190) and 23.7 % (45 / 190), respectively), suboptimal in 22 % (42 / 190) of cases, 5 % (10 / 190) only a diagnostic laparoscopy due to the initial underestimation of the tumor dissemination. In the entire sample PCI value ranged from 0 to 35 points, the median was 4 points (2; 11). In the group of optimal cytoreductions PCI ranged from 0 to 19 points, median – 3 points (2; 6), in the group of suboptimal from 5 to 35 points, median – 19.5 points (15; 23) (p < 0.0001, Mann–Whitney test). No optimal cytoreduction was performed in PCI >20 points. The optimal cut-off PCI point was 9.5 points (sensitivity 92.1 %, specificity 86.2 %, overall accuracy 87.4 %), if PCI ≤ 9 points – the operation will be hypothetically optimal, if PCI ≥ 10 then hypothetically suboptimal. The main cause of non-optimal interventions (n = 52) were: diffuse carcinomatosis of the small bowel and its mesentery – 73 % (38 / 52), carcinomatosis of the hepatoduodenal zone – 9 % (5 / 52) and a total of 16 % (9 / 52) were other non-resectable tumors (paraaortal, intrathoracic lymph nodes, invasion of the pancreas or pleura, lung metastases). Radiation diagnostic and intraoperative revision were comparable in 60.5 % (115 / 190) of cases. The sensitivity of radiological diagnostic methods in detecting of the small intestine lesions was 23.7 %, the specificity was 90 %, while for laparoscopic diagnostics, the sensitivity in detecting of the small intestine lesions was 93.3 %, and the specificity was 100 %. In assessing of carcinomatosis of the hepatoduodenal zone, the advantage belongs to radiation diagnostic methods: the sensitivity of computed tomography was 66.7 %, the specificity was 97 %, while the sensitivity of diagnostic laparoscopy was 0 %.

   Conclusions. Determination of a high score in assessing the index of peritoneal carcinomatosis, detection of damage to the hepatoduodenal zone, diagnosed mainly by radiation imaging methods, detection of diffuse lesions of the small intestine, determined mainly by laparoscopic diagnosis reduces the frequency of suboptimal cytoreductive operations from 67 % to 13 %.

1. Narod S. A., Kotsopoulos J., Rosen B. et al. Ten-year survival after epithelial ovarian cancer is not associated with BRCA mutation status. Gynecol Oncol 2016; 140 (1): 42–7. DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2015.11.009

2. Bristow R. E., Tomacruz R. S., Armstrong D. K. et al. Survival effect of maximal cytoreductive surgery for advanced ovarian carcinoma during the platinum era: a meta-analysis. J Clin Oncol 2002; 20: 1248–59. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2002.20.5.1248

3. Du Bois A., Reuss A., Pujade-Lauraine E. et al. Role of surgical outcome as prognostic factor in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer: A combined exploratory analysis of 3 prospectively randomized phase 3 multicenter trials: by the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynaekologische Onkologie Studiengruppe Ovarialkarzinom (AGO-OVAR) and the Groupe d’Investigateurs Nationaux Pour les Etudes des Cancers de l’Ovaire (GINECO). Cancer 2009; 115 (6): 1234–44. DOI: 10.1002/cncr.24149

4. Griffiths C. T. Surgical resection of tumor bulk in the primary treatment of ovarian carcinoma. Nat Cancer Inst Monograph 1975; 42: 101–4.

5. Vergote I., Trope C. G., Amant F. et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy or primary surgery in stage IIIC or IV ovarian cancer. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer-Gynaecological Cancer Group; NCIC Clinical Trials Group. New Eng J Med 2010; 363 (10): 943–53. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa0908806

6. Bagul K., Vijaykumar D. K., Rajanbabu A. et al. Advanced primary epithelial ovarian and peritoneal carcinoma-does diagnostic accuracy of preoperative CT scan for detection of peritoneal metastatic sites reflect into prediction of suboptimal debulking? A prospective study. Ind J Surg Oncol 2017; 8 (2): 98–104. DOI: 10.1007/s13193-016-0601-6

7. Nasser S., Lazaridis A., Evangelou M. et al. Correlation of pre-operative CT findings with surgical and histological tumor dissemination patterns at cytoreduction for primary advanced and relapsed epithelial ovarian cancer: A retrospective evaluation. Gynecol Oncol 2016; 143 (2): 264–9. DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2016.08.322

8. Low R. N., Barone R. M., Lucero J. Comparison of MRI and CT for predicting the peritoneal cancer index (PCI) preoperatively in patients being considered for cytoreductive surgical procedures. Ann Surg Oncol 2015; 22 (5): 1708–15. DOI: 10.1245/s10434-014-4041-7

9. Gadelhak B., Tawfik A. M., Saleh G. A. et al. Extended abdominopelvic MRI versus CT at the time of adnexal mass characterization for assessing radiologic peritoneal cancer index (PCI) prior to cytoreductive surgery. Abdom Radiol (New York) 2019; 44 (6): 2254–61. DOI: 10.1007/s00261-019-01939-y

10. Klumpp B. D., Schwenzer N., Aschoff P. et al. Preoperative assessment of peritoneal carcinomatosis: intraindividual comparison of 18F-FDG PET/CT and MRI. Abdom Imag 2013; 38: 64–71. DOI: 10.1007/s00261-012-9881-7

11. Lopez-Lopez V., Cascales-Campos P. A., Gil J. et al. Use of 18 F-FDG PET/CT in the preoperative evaluation of patients diagnosed with peritoneal carcinomatosis of ovarian origin, candidates to cytoreduction and hipec. A pending issue. Eur J Radiol 2016; 85: 1824–8. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2016.08.006

12. Van de Vrie R., Rutten M. J., Asseler J. D. et al. Laparoscopy for diagnosing resectability of disease in women with advanced ovarian cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2019; 3: CD009786. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009786.pub3

13. Rutten M. J., van Meurs H. S., van de Vrie R. et al. Laparoscopy to predict the result of primary cytoreductive surgery in patients with advanced ovarian cancer: a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Oncol 2017; 35 (6): 613–21. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2016.69.2962

14. Fagotti A., Fanfani F., Ludovisi M. et al. Role of laparoscopy to assess the chance of optimal сytoreductive surgery in advanced ovarian cancer: a pilot study. Gynecol Oncol 2005; 96: 729–35. DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2004.11.031

15. Sugarbaker P. H. Management of peritoneal surface malignancy: The surgeon’s role. Langenbeck’s Arch Surg 1999; 384: 576–87. DOI: 10.1007/s004230050246

16. Heitz F., Harter P., du Bois A. et al. Pattern of and reason for postoperative residual disease in patients with advanced ovarian cancer following upfront radical debulking surgery. Gynecol Oncol 2016; 141: 264–70. DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2016.03.015

17. Rosendahl M., Harter P., Bjorn S. F. et al. Specific regions, rather than the entire peritoneal carcinosis index, are predictive of complete resection and survival in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2018; 28 (2): 316–22. DOI: 10.1097/IGC.0000000000001253

18. Nougaret S., Addley H. C., Colombo P. E. et al. Ovarian carcinomatosis: how the radiologist can help plan the surgical approach. Radiographics 2012; 32: 1775–800. DOI: 10.1148/rg.326125511