Risks and benefits of systematic lymphadenectomy during interval debulking surgery for advanced high grade serous ovarian cancer.

BACKGROUND: Lymphadenectomy is debated in patients with ovarian cancer. The aim of our study was to evaluate the impact of lymphadenectomy in patients with high-grade serous ovarian cancer receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) followed by interval debulking surgery (IDS). METHODS: A retrospective, unicentric study including all patients undergoing NACT and IDS was carried out from 2005 to 2018. Patients with and without lymphadenectomy were compared in terms of recurrence free survival (RFS), overall survival (OS), and complication rates. RESULTS: We included 203 patients. Of these, 133 had a lymphadenectomy (65.5%) and 77 had involved nodes (57.9%). Patients without a lymphadenectomy were older, had a more extensive disease and less complete CRS. No differences were noted between the lymphadenectomy and no lymphadenectomy group concerning 2-year RFS (47.4% and 48.6%, p = 0.87, respectively) and 5-year OS (63.2% versus 58.6%, p = 0.41, respectively). Post-operative complications tended to be more frequent in the lymphadenectomy group (18.57% versus 31.58%, p = 0.09). In patients with a lymphadenectomy, survival was significantly altered if the nodes were involved (positive nodes: 2-year RFS 42.5% and 5-year OS 49.4%, negative nodes: 2-year RFS 60.7% and 5-year OS 82.2%, p = 0.03 and p < 0.001, respectively). CONCLUSION: Lymphadenectomy during IDS does not improve survival and increases post-operative complications.

What can we learn from the 10 mm lymph node size cut-off on the CT in advanced ovarian cancer at the time of interval debulking surgery?

INTRODUCTION: The benefit of a systematic lymphadenectomy is still debated in patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) followed by interval debulking surgery (IDS) in ovarian cancer (OC). The objective of this study was to evaluate the predictive value of the pre-NACT and post-NACT CT in predicting definitive histological lymph node involvement. The prognostic value of a positive node on the CT was also assessed. MATERIEL AND METHODS: A retrospective, unicentric cohort study was performed including all patients with ovarian cancer who underwent NACT and IDS with a lymphadenectomy between 2005 and 2018. CT were analyzed blinded to pathology, and nodes with small axis ≥ 10 mm on CT were considered positive. Sensitivity (Se), specificity (Sp), and negative (NPV) and positive predictive values (PPV) and their CI95% were calculated. The 2-year recurrence free survival (RFS) and 5-year overall survival (OS) was compared. RESULTS: 158 patients were included, among which 92 (58%) had histologically positive lymph nodes. CT had a Se, Sp, NPV and PPV of 35%, 82%, 47% and 73% before NACT and 20%, 97%, 47% and 91% after NACT, respectively. Patients with nodes considered positive had a non-significant lower 2-year RFS and 5-year OS on the pre-NACT and post-NACT CT. Patients at 'high risk' (nodes stayed positive on the CT or became positive after NACT) also had a non-significant lower 2-year RFS and 5-year OS. CONCLUSION: Presence of enlarged lymph nodes on CT is a weak indicator of lymph node involvement in patients with advanced ovarian cancer undergoing NACT. However, it could be used to assess prognosis.