Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for advanced ovarian cancer: literature data and in vitro studies
- Authors: Kuznetsov S.A.1,2, Shubina I.Z.1,2, Mamedova L.T.1,2, Gritsay A.N.1,2, Nasyrova R.Y.1,2, Kiselevsky M.V.1,2, Kuznetsov V.V.1,2
-
Affiliations:
- N.N. Blokhin Russian Cancer Research Center
- 23 Kashirskoe Shosse, Moscow, 115478, Russia
- Issue: Vol 11, No 3 (2015)
- Pages: 61-66
- Section: GYNECOLOGY. PROBLEM
- Published: 15.09.2015
- URL: https://ojrs.abvpress.ru/ojrs/article/view/448
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.17650/1994-4098-2015-11-3-61-66
- ID: 448
Cite item
Full Text
Abstract
This paper analyzes large amounts of literature data on studies of the efficiency of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) for advanced ovarian cancer (OC), which is performed prior to standard surgery. Clinical trials have demonstrated that a NCT regimen followed by cytoreductive surgery is less effective than primary cytoreductive one; however, evidence for the benefit of NCT is lacking so far. The authors conducted investigations using the intraoperative material obtained from 17 patients with T3a–cNxM0 OC, who were divided for a comparative examination into 2 groups. Group 1 included OC patents who received NCT; Group 2 comprised OC patients who did not. The tumor cells obtained from the intraoperative material of both groups were able to generate a well-proliferating culture in in vitro experiments. The cultured OC cells were characterized, by analyzing cytological specimens and the functional activity of these cells. It was ascertained that 35 % of the cultured tumor cells from OC retained their resistance to the cytotoxic action of effector cells (autologous lymphocytes) at a target cell/effector cell ratio of 1:5. Thus, both the literature and the experiment provide no unambiguous evidence supporting the fact that NCT before cytoreductive surgery is a better approach than primary surgical treatment. The optimal regimen of NCT, which would be able to enhance its efficiency, remains important.
About the authors
S. A. Kuznetsov
N.N. Blokhin Russian Cancer Research Center; 23 Kashirskoe Shosse, Moscow, 115478, RussiaRussian Federation
I. Zh. Shubina
N.N. Blokhin Russian Cancer Research Center; 23 Kashirskoe Shosse, Moscow, 115478, Russia
Author for correspondence.
Email: irinashubina@mail.ru
Russian Federation
L. T. Mamedova
N.N. Blokhin Russian Cancer Research Center; 23 Kashirskoe Shosse, Moscow, 115478, RussiaRussian Federation
A. N. Gritsay
N.N. Blokhin Russian Cancer Research Center; 23 Kashirskoe Shosse, Moscow, 115478, RussiaRussian Federation
R. Yu. Nasyrova
N.N. Blokhin Russian Cancer Research Center; 23 Kashirskoe Shosse, Moscow, 115478, RussiaRussian Federation
M. V. Kiselevsky
N.N. Blokhin Russian Cancer Research Center; 23 Kashirskoe Shosse, Moscow, 115478, RussiaRussian Federation
V. V. Kuznetsov
N.N. Blokhin Russian Cancer Research Center; 23 Kashirskoe Shosse, Moscow, 115478, RussiaRussian Federation
References
Supplementary files

