Prognostic value of systemic inflammation response indexes obtained from the complete blood count in patients treated for advanced ovarian carcinoma in front line.

OBJECTIVE: Various systemic inflammation response indexes (SIRI) have repeatedly been described as prognostic factors in ovarian cancer. They have not been validated in prospective trials and published results are sometimes contradictory. We aimed to explore their role in a cohort of patients diagnosed with stage III and IV ovarian cancer treated at our institution. METHODS: We retrospectively examined the prognostic influence of the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), the platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), the monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio (MLR), the red cell distribution width (RDW), and the mean platelet volume (MPV). RESULTS: A total of 77 patients were analyzed. NLR > 2.243 at diagnosis, NLR before primary surgery, MLR at diagnosis, PLR > 289.1 at diagnosis, and PLR at diagnosis were significant in univariate Cox regression for progression-free survival, but none of them retained their significance in the multivariate Cox regression analysis. For overall survival, NLR > = 2.53 at diagnosis, MLR > = 0.245 at diagnosis, and PLR > = 198.3 at diagnosis resulted significant in univariate COX regression; only PLR > = 198.3 at diagnosis retained its significance in the multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: In our cohort, PLR > = 198.3 was an independent prognostic factor for worse OS. The definitive role of SIRI in ovarian cancer has not yet been established. If their value as prognostic factors could finally be established, they would become a simple and economical method to predict prognosis in patients with advanced ovarian cancer. Therefore, it is time to conduct prospective, multicenter studies with larger samples to definitively establish its role in ovarian cancer, if any.

An international worldwide retrospective cohort observational study comparing primary cytoreductive surgery with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and interval cytoreductive surgery in patients with carcinoma of the ovary, fallopian tubes, and peritoneum (SUROVA trial).

BACKGROUND: Currently, a lively debate exists within the scientific community regarding the most suitable procedure for treating stages IIIB-IVB carcinoma of the ovary, fallopian tubes, and peritoneum. The options under most consideration are primary cytoreductive surgery or neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by interval cytoreductive surgery. PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: To compare overall survival at 5 years in patients who underwent primary cytoreductive surgery versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy and interval cytoreductive surgery for stage IIIB-IVB ovarian cancer STUDY HYPOTHESIS: The treatment with primary cytoreductive surgery results in superior patient survival compared with neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by interval cytoreductive surgery. TRIAL DESIGN: This is a multicenter, retrospective cohort observational study. Data will be collected from patients undergoing surgery in hospitals worldwide. Two arms will be compared: primary cytoreductive surgery and neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by interval cytoreductive surgery. MAJOR INCLUSION/EXCLUSION CRITERIA: Patients must have suspected or histologically confirmed International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stages IIIB-IVB ovarian, peritoneal, or fallopian tube cancers. They must have undergone primary surgery or first course of neoadjuvant chemotherapy between January 1, 2018 and December 31, 2019. Based on all available information before the surgery (primary or interval), the patient must have been considered completely resectable. PRIMARY ENDPOINT: Overall survival at 5 years from the first treatment (chemotherapy in the case of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and cytoreduction in the case of primary cytoreductive surgery). SAMPLE SIZE: An estimated total of 5000 patients will be enrolled in the study. ESTIMATED DATES FOR COMPLETING ACCRUAL AND PRESENTING RESULTS: March 2025 TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT06223763.

Dendritic Cells in Cancer Immunology and Immunotherapy.

Cancer immunotherapy modulates the immune system, overcomes immune escape and stimulates immune defenses against tumors. Dendritic cells (DCs) are professional promoters of immune responses against tumor antigens with the outstanding ability to coordinate the innate and adaptive immune systems. Evidence suggests that there is a decrease in both the number and function of DCs in cancer patients. Therefore, they represent a strong scaffold for therapeutic interventions. DC vaccination (DCV) is safe, and the antitumoral responses induced are well established in solid tumors. Although the addition of checkpoint inhibitors (CPIs) to chemotherapy has provided new options in the treatment of cancer, they have shown no clinical benefit in immune desert tumors or in those tumors with dysfunctional or exhausted T-cells. In this way, DC-based therapy has demonstrated the ability to modify the tumor microenvironment for immune enriched tumors and to potentiate systemic host immune responses as an active approach to treating cancer patients. Application of DCV in cancer seeks to obtain long-term antitumor responses through an improved T-cell priming by enhancing previous or generating de novo immune responses. To date, DCV has induced immune responses in the peripheral blood of patients without a significant clinical impact on outcome. Thus, improvements in vaccines formulations, selection of patients based on biomarkers and combinations with other antitumoral therapies are needed to enhance patient survival. In this work, we review the role of DCV in different solid tumors with their strengths and weaknesses, and we finally mention new trends to improve the efficacy of this immune strategy.