Moving beyond “complete surgical resection” and “optimal”: Is low-volume residual disease another option for primary debulking surgery?

Publication date: Available online 20 June 2018
Source:Gynecologic Oncology
Author(s): Beryl L. Manning-Geist, Katherine Hicks-Courant, Allison A. Gockley, Rachel M. Clark, Marcela G. del Carmen, Whitfield B. Growdon, Neil S. Horowitz, Ross S. Berkowitz, Michael G. Muto, Michael J. Worley
ObjectivesTo examine the relationship between volume of residual disease and oncologic outcomes among patients with advanced-stage epithelial ovarian/fallopian tube/primary peritoneal carcinoma undergoing primary debulking surgery (PDS). For patients that did not undergo a complete surgical resection (CSR), a surrogate for volume of residual disease was used to assess oncologic outcomes.MethodsMedical records of patients with FIGO stage IIIC and IV epithelial ovarian/fallopian tube/primary peritoneal carcinoma undergoing PDS between January 2010 and November 2014 were reviewed. Patient demographics, operative characteristics, residual disease, anatomic site of residual disease and outcome data were collected. Among patients who did not undergo CSR, but had ≤1 cm of residual disease, the number of anatomic sites (single location vs. multiple locations) with residual disease was utilized as a surrogate for volume of residual disease. The effect of residual disease volume on progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) was evaluated.ResultsOf 240 patients undergoing PDS, 94 (39.2%) had CSR, 41 (17.1%) had ≤1 cm of residual disease confined to a single anatomic location (≤1 cm-SL), 67 (27.9%) had ≤1 cm of residual disease in multiple anatomic locations (≤1 cm-ML) and 38 (15.8%) were sub-optimally (SO) debulked. Median PFS for CSR, ≤1 cm-SL, ≤1 cm-ML and SO-debulked were: 23, 19, 13 and 10 months, respectively (p < 0.001). Median OS for CSR, ≤1 cm-SL, ≤1 cm-ML and SO-debulked were: Not yet reached, 64, 50 and 49 months, respectively (p = 0.001).ConclusionsFollowing PDS, CSR and ≤ 1 cm-SL patients have the best prognosis. In contrast, despite being considered “optimally debulked”, ≤1 cm-ML patients have survival similar to those SO-debulked.