Expert consensus: Profiling and management of advanced or metastatic epithelial ovarian cancer / Consenso de expertos basado en la evidencia: perfilamiento y manejo del carcinoma epitelial de ovario de alto grado avanzado.

Introduction and objective: The approach to patients with advanced or metastatic high-grade epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) has evolved over time with the advent of new therapies and multimodal strategies. The objective of this consensus of experts is to generate national recommendations for the profiling and management of advanced or metastatic high-grade OEC, defined as stages III and IV of the "The International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) classification at the time of diagnosis to base on the literature review that included international evidence-based clinical practice guidelines (CPG). Material and methods: Eleven panelists (oncologists and gynecological oncologists) answered 8 questions about the profiling and management of advanced or metastatic ovarian epithelial carcinoma. The panelists were chosen for their academic profile and influence in national health institutions. Guidelines from the "ESMO Standardized Operating Procedures Consensus Conference" were used to develop the consensus. It was agreed that the level of agreement to accept a recommendation should be ≥ 80%. The document was peer reviewed. Results: Eight general recommendations are made, which are presented into five domains. Some of these recommendations are subdivided into specific recommendations. Initial treatment Recommendation 1.1 Complete primary cytoreduction (PCS) surgery is suggested as the initial therapy of choice for patients with high-grade or metastatic EOC, which should ideally be carried out in centers with experience, followed by adjuvant therapy. 1.2 Neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by interval cytoreduction surgery (ICS) is suggested in those who are unlikely to achieve a complete cytoreduction in PCS either due to unresectable metastatic disease or who present unresectability criteria (imaging, laparoscopic and/or by laparotomy) and that have been defined by a gynecological oncologist and patients with poor functional status and comorbidities according to the criteria of the multidisciplinary team (clinical oncology, gynecological oncology, radiology, etc.). Recommendation 2. In patients with high-grade epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC), in stage III locally advanced or metastatic, who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy and achieved a complete or partial response (cytoreduction with tumor residue < 2.5 mm), the use of Hyperthermic IntraPeritoneal Chemotherapy (HIPEC) could be considered as an alternative to standard platinum-based adjuvant intravenous chemotherapy during interval cytoreductive surgery, after discussion in a multidisciplinary tumor board, at a center experienced in treating this type of patients. Use of genetic testing. Recommendation 3. It is suggested at the time of diagnosis to offer molecular genetic testing to all patients with high-grade advanced or metastatic EOC regardless of family history. Recommendation 4. It is suggested to offer genetic counseling, by qualified personnel, to all patients with high-grade advanced or metastatic EOC who are ordered genetic testing. Recommendation 5. It is suggested that all patients with advanced or metastatic high-grade EOC undergo a germ panel that includes the Breast Cancer Susceptibility Genes 1/2 genes (BRCA 1/2) and the other susceptibility genes according to with institutional protocols and the availability of genetic testing panels; If it is negative, then somatic testing should be performed that includes the homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) status, regardless of family history. Adjuvant Therapy Recommendation 6. 6.1. It is suggested that all patients with advanced stage III/IV EOC, with PSC of (0-2), got adjuvant intravenous chemotherapy as standard treatment within six weeks after Prc. It is suggested paclitaxel/carboplatin. Recommendation 6.2. It is suggested to use standard chemotherapy base on platinum plus Bevacizumab as adjuvant chemotherapy to patients with high-risk disease (EOC stage IV or stage III with suboptimal tumor cytoreduction), following by bevacizumab as maintenance. The use of bevacizumab as maintenance therapy is not recommended if bevacizumab was not included in the first line of treatment. We suggested the dose used in GOG-0218 and ICON7 trials. Recommendation 6.3 It is suggested combined intravenous/intraperitoneal chemotherapy only for selected patients, with optimal cytoreduction (residual lesions < 1 cm), especially those without residual disease (R0) and who are evaluated in a multidisciplinary meeting. It is not considered standard treatment. Recommendation 6.4. 6.4.1 It is suggested to use Poly ADP ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors such as olaparib or niraparib as maintenance after receiving first-line chemotherapy in patients with stage III/IV BRCA1/2 positive EOC who received platinumbased chemotherapy and obtained complete response/partial response (CR/PR), 6.4.2 It is suggested to use olaparib alone or in combination with bevacizumab or niraparib in patients with stage III/IV BRCA1/2 positive EOC who received platinum-based chemotherapy plus bevacizumab and achieved CR/PR. 6.4.3 It is suggested to use niraparibin patients with stage III/IV BRCA1/2 negative or unknown EOC who received platinum-based chemotherapy and achieved CR/PR. 6.4.4 It is suggested to use bevacizumab or olaparib plus bevacizumab in patients with EOC stage III/IV BRCA1/2 negative or unknown (HRD positive) who received platinum-based chemotherapy plus bevacizumab and obtained CR/PR. Treatment of disease relapse Recommendation 7. Secondary cytoreductive surgery followed by chemotherapy is suggested for selected patients with high-grade advanced EOC in first relapse, platinum-sensitive (platinum-free interval ≥ 6 months), positive "Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynäkologische Onkologie ­ AGO" score or "I-model" positive (< 4.7) with a potential resection to R0 in centers with access to optimal surgical and postoperative support. Note: Platinum-free interval and AGO score have only been developed as positive predictors of complete resection and not to exclude patients from surgery. Recommendation 8. 8.1 For patients with relapse advanced high-grade EOC platinum-sensitive, the following is suggested: Platinum-based combination chemotherapy: carboplatin/liposomal doxorubicin or carboplatin/paclitaxel or carboplatin/nab-paclitaxel or carboplatin/docetaxel or carboplatin/gemcitabine) for six cycles. If combination therapy is not tolerated, give carboplatin or cisplatin alone. Combination chemotherapy (carboplatin/gemcitabine or carboplatin/paclitaxel or carboplatin/doxorubicin liposomal) plus bevacizumab followed by bevacizumab as maintenance (until progression or toxicity). Recommendation 8.2 For patients with relapsed advanced high-grade EOC platinum-resistant, it is suggested: Sequential treatment with chemotherapy, preferably with a non-platinum single agent (weekly paclitaxel or pegylated liposomal doxorubicin or docetaxel or oral etoposide or gemcitabine or trabectidine or, topotecan). Weekly paclitaxel or pegylated liposomal doxorubicin or topotecan could be administrate with or without bevacizumab. Other agents are considered potentially active (capecitabine, cyclophosphamide, ifosfamide, irinotecan, oxaliplatin, pemetrexed, vinorelbine, cyclophosphamide) could be recommended for later lines. Hormone receptor-positive patients who do not tolerate or have no response to cytotoxic regimens may receive hormone therapy with tamoxifen or other agents, including aromatase inhibitors (anastrozole and letrozole) or leuprolide acetate, or megestrol acetate. Patients with a performance score ≥ 3 should be considered only for best supportive care. Recommendation 8.3 Maintenance therapy with PARP inhibitors: It is suggested in patients with relapse advanced high-grade EOC stage III/IV BRCA1/2 (positive, negative or unknown) who have received two or more lines of platinum-based chemotherapy and have achieved CR/PR, use olaparib, niraparib or rucaparib. Niraparib could be useful in BRCA 1/2 +/-/unknown patients, as rucaparib, however, the latter does not yet have approval from the regulatory office in Colombia. Conclusions: It is expected that the recommendations issued in this consensus will contribute to improving clinical care, oncological impact, and quality of life of these women.

Introducción y objetivo: el abordaje de pacientes con cáncer epitelial de ovario (CEO) de alto grado avanzado o metastásico ha ido evolucionando a través del tiempo con el advenimiento de nuevas terapias y estrategias multimodales. El objetivo de este consenso de expertos es generar recomendaciones nacionales para el perfilamiento y manejo del CEO de alto grado avanzado o metastásico, definido como estadios III y IV de la clasificación de la Federación Internacional de Ginecología y Obstetricia (FIGO) al momento del diagnóstico, a partir de la revisión de la literatura que incluyó guías de práctica clínica (GPC) internacionales basadas en la evidencia. Materiales y métodos: once panelistas (oncólogos y ginecólogos oncólogos) respondieron ocho preguntas sobre el perfilamiento y manejo del carcinoma epitelial de ovario avanzado o metastásico. Los panelistas fueron escogidos por su perfil académico e influencia en instituciones de salud nacionales. Para el desarrollo del consenso se utilizaron los lineamientos de la "Conferencia de consenso de procedimientos operativos estandarizados de ESMO". Se definió que el nivel de acuerdo para aceptar una recomendación debía ser ≥ 80%. El documento fue revisado por pares. Resultados: Se hacen 8 recomendaciones generales, presentadas en cinco dominios; algunas de ellas se subdividen en recomendaciones específicas. Tratamiento inicial Recomendación 1 1.1. Como terapia inicial de elección para pacientes con CEO de alto grado o metastásico se sugiere la cirugía de citorreducción primaria (Cpr) completa que, idealmente, debe realizarse en centros con experiencia, seguida de terapia adyuvante. 1.2. Se sugiere quimioterapia neoadyuvante seguida de cirugía de citorreducción de intervalo (Cint) en quienes sea improbable alcanzar una citorreducción completa en la Cpr, bien sea por enfermedad metastásica no resecable o que presenten criterios de irresecabilidad (imagenológicos, laparoscópicos o por laparotomía) que hayan sido definidos por un ginecólogo oncólogo. También en pacientes con un pobre estado funcional y comorbilidades de acuerdo con el criterio del equipo multidisciplinario (oncología clínica, ginecología oncológica, radiología, etc.). Recomendación 2. En pacientes con CEO de alto grado, en estadio III localmente avanzado o metastásico, que recibieron quimioterapia neoadyuvante y alcanzaron respuesta completa o parcial (citorreducción con residuo tumoral < 2,5 mm), se podría evaluar el uso de la quimioterapia intraperitoneal hipertérmica (Hyperthermic IntraPeritoneal Chemotherapy - HIPEC) como alternativa a la quimioterapia IV adyuvante estándar basada en platinos durante la Cint, previa discusión en junta multidisciplinaria, en un centro de experiencia en este tipo de pacientes. Uso de pruebas genéticas Recomendación 3. Al momento del diagnóstico, se sugiere ofrecer testeo molecular genético a toda paciente con CEO de alto grado avanzado o metastásico, independientemente de la historia familiar. Recomendación 4. Se sugiere ofrecer asesoramiento genético, por parte de personal calificado, a toda paciente con CEO de alto grado avanzado o metastásico a quien se le ordene un testeo genético. Recomendación 5. Se sugiere que a toda paciente con CEO de alto grado avanzado o metastásico se le realice panel germinal que incluya los genes de susceptibilidad al cáncer de mama 1/2 (BRCA 1/2) y los otros genes de susceptibilidad de acuerdo con los protocolos institucionales y la disponibilidad de paneles de testeo genético; si es negativo entonces se debería realizar testeo somático que incluya el estatus de deficiencia de la recombinación homóloga (homologous recombination deficiency - HRD), independientemente de la historia familiar. Terapia adyuvante Recomendación 6 6.1. Se sugiere que a toda paciente con CEO estadios III/IV avanzado o metastásico, con estatus de desempeño (performance score care - PSC) de 0-2 se le administre como tratamiento estándar quimioterapia intravenosa (IV) adyuvante dentro de las seis semanas posteriores a la Cpr. Se sugiere administrar paclitaxel/carboplatino. 6.2. Se sugiere utilizar quimioterapia estándar basada en platino más bevacizumab como adyuvancia en pacientes con enfermedad de alto riesgo (CEO estadios IV o III con citorreducción tumoral subóptima), continuando con bevacizumab como mantenimiento. No se recomienda el uso de bevacizumab como terapia de mantenimiento si no se incluyó en la primera línea de tratamiento. Se sugiere seguir los esquemas de los estudios Gynecologic Oncology Group Study (GOG-0218) e International Collaborative Ovarian Neoplasm (ICON7). 6.3. Se sugiere la quimioterapia combinada IV/intraperitoneal (IP) solo para pacientes seleccionadas, con una citorreducción óptima (lesiones residuales < 1 cm), en especial aquellas sin enfermedad residual (R0) y que sean evaluadas en junta multidisciplinaria. La quimioterapia combinada IV/IP no se considera como tratamiento estándar. 6.4. 6.4.1. Se sugiere utilizar inhibidores de poli(ADP-ribosa) polimerasa (PARP) tales como olaparib o niraparib como mantenimiento después de recibir una primera línea de quimioterapia en pacientes con CEO estadios III/IV BRCA1/2 positivo que recibieron quimioterapia basada en platino y obtuvieron respuesta completa/respuesta parcial (RC/RP). 6.4.2. Se sugiere utilizar olaparib solo o en combinación con bevacizumab o niraparib en pacientes con CEO estadios III/IV BRCA1/2 positivo que recibieron quimioterapia basada en platino más bevacizumab y obtuvieron RC/RP. 6.4.3. Se sugiere utilizar niraparib en pacientes con CEO estadio III/IV BRCA1/2 negativo o desconocido que recibieron quimioterapia basada en platino y obtuvieron RC/RP. 6.4.4. Se sugiere utilizar bevacizumab u olaparib más bevacizumab en pacientes con CEO estadios III/IV BRCA1/2 negativo o desconocido (HRD positivo) que recibieron quimioterapia basada en platino más bevacizumab y obtuvieron RC/RP. Tratamiento de la recaída de la enfermedad Recomendación 7. Se sugiere la realización de la cirugía de citorreducción secundaria (Csec), seguida de quimioterapia, a pacientes seleccionadas con CEO de alto grado avanzado o metastásico en primera recaída, platino-sensibles (intervalo libre de platinos ≥ 6 meses), puntuación Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynäkologische Onkologie (AGO) positiva o Integrate model (I-Model) positivo (< 4,7), y con una potencial resección a R0, en centros con acceso a soporte quirúrgico y posoperatorio óptimo. Nota: el intervalo libre de tratamiento con platinos y la puntuación AGO solo se han desarrollado como predictores positivos de resección completa y no para excluir a las pacientes de la cirugía. Recomendación 8 8.1. Para pacientes con CEO de alto grado avanzado o metastásico en recaída platino-sensibles se sugiere: Quimioterapia combinada basada en platino: carboplatino/doxorrubicina liposomal o carboplatino/paclitaxel o carboplatino/ nab-paclitaxel o carboplatino/docetaxel o carboplatino/gemcitabina, por seis ciclos. Si no se tolera la terapia combinada, dar carboplatino o cisplatino solo. Quimioterapia combinada: carboplatino/gemcitabina o carboplatino/paclitaxel o carboplatino/doxorubicina liposomal, más bevacizumab, seguida de bevacizumab como mantenimiento (hasta progresión o toxicidad). 8.2. Para pacientes con CEO de alto grado avanzado o metastásico en recaída, platino-resistentes, se sugiere: Tratamiento secuencial con quimioterapia, preferiblemente con un agente único que no sea un platino (paclitaxel semanal o doxorrubicina liposomal pegilada o docetaxel o etopósido oral o gemcitabina o trabectidina o topotecan). El paclitaxel semanal o la doxorrubicina liposomal pegilada o el topotecan pueden ser administrados con o sin bevacizumab. Existen otros agentes que se consideran potencialmente act ivos (capecitabina, ciclofosfamida, ifosfamida, irinotecán, oxaliplatino, pemetrexed, vinorelbina, ciclofosfamida), que se podrían recomendar para líneas posteriores. Las pacientes con receptores hormonales positivos que no toleran o no tienen respuesta a los regímenes citotóxicos pueden recibir terapia hormonal con tamoxifeno u otros agentes, incluidos los inhibidores de la aromatasa (anastrozol y letrozol) o acetato de leuprolide o acetato de megestrol. Pacientes con PSC ≥ 3 deberían ser consideradas solo para el mejor cuidado de soporte. 8.3. Terapia de mantenimiento con inhibidores PARP. Para pacientes con CEO de alto grado avanzado o metastásico en recaída estadios III/IV BRCA1/2 (positivo, negativo o desconocido), que hayan recibido dos o más líneas de quimioterapia basada en platino y hayan alcanzado RC/RP, se sugiere utilizar olaparib, niraparib o rucaparib. El niraparib podría ser útil en pacientes BRCA 1/2 +/-/desconocido, al igual que el rucaparib, sin embargo, este último no tiene aún aprobación del ente regulador en Colombia. Conclusiones: se espera que las recomendaciones emitidas en este consenso contribuyan a mejorar la atención clínica, el impacto oncológico y la calidad de vida de estas mujeres.

Survival Difference of Endometrial Cancer Patients with Peritoneal Metastasis Receiving Cytoreductive Surgery (CRS) with and without Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy (HIPEC): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Although several studies have been completed to investigate the effect of cytoreductive surgery (CRS) with or without hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in endometrial cancer with peritoneal metastasis (ECPM), a direct comparison was not performed previously. A meta-analysis was performed to investigate the suspected additional survival benefits of CRS plus HIPEC over CRS only. Twenty-one and ten studies with a total number of 1116 and 152 cases investigating CRS only and CRS plus HIPEC were identified, respectively. When all articles were analyzed, the 1-year survival rate was 17.60% higher for CRS plus HIPEC (82.28% vs. 64.68%; p = 0.0102). The same tendency was observed for the 2-year (56.07% vs. 36.95%; difference: 19.12%; p = 0.0014), but not for the 5-year (21.88% vs. 16.45%; difference: 5.43%; p = 0.3918) survival rates. The same clinical significance, but statistically less strong observations, could be made if only the studies published after 2010 were investigated (1-year survival rate: 12.08% and p = 0.0648; 2-year survival rate: 10.90% and p = 0.0988). CRS remains one of the core elements of ECPM treatment, but the addition of HIPEC to CRS can increase the positive clinical outcome, especially in the first 2 years.

A pre-operative scoring model to estimate the risk of blood transfusion over an ovarian cancer debulking surgery (BLOODS score): a Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center Team Ovary study.

OBJECTIVES: To develop a pre-operative tool to estimate the risk of peri-operative packed red blood cell transfusion in primary debulking surgery. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed an institutional database to identify patients who underwent primary debulking surgery for ovarian cancer at a single center between January 1, 2001 and May 31, 2019. Receiver operating characteristic curve and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) were calculated. Five-fold cross-validation was applied to the multivariate model. Significant variables were assigned a 'BLOODS' (BLood transfusion Over an Ovarian cancer Debulking Surgery) score of +1 if present. A total BLOODS score was calculated for each patient, and the odds of receiving a transfusion was determined for each score. RESULTS: Overall, 1566 patients met eligibility criteria; 800 (51%) underwent a peri-operative blood transfusion. Odds ratios (OR) were statistically significant for American Society of Anesthesiologists scores of 3 and 4 (OR 1.34, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.09 to 1.63), pre-operative levels of cancer antigen 125 (CA125) (OR 2.43, 95% CI 1.98 to 2.99), platelets (OR 1.59, 95% CI 1.45 to 1.74), obesity (OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.96), presence of carcinomatosis (OR 2.45, 95% CI 1.93 to 3.11), bulky upper abdominal disease (OR 2.86, 95% CI 2.32 to 3.54), pre-operative serum albumin level (OR 0.31, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.40), and pre-operative hemoglobin level (OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.61). The corrected AUC was 0.748 (95% CI 0.693 to 0.804). BLOODS scores of 0 and 5 corresponded to 11% and 73% odds, respectively, of receiving a peri-operative blood transfusion. CONCLUSIONS: We developed a universal pre-operative scoring system, the BLOODS score, to help identify patients with ovarian cancer who would benefit from surgical planning and blood-saving techniques. The BLOODS score was directly proportional to the American Society of Anesthesiologists score, presence of upper abdominal disease, carcinomatosis, CA125 level, and platelets level. We believe this model can help physicians with surgical planning and can benefit patient outcomes.

Effect of quality control program on surgical management in advanced ovarian cancer.

OBJECTIVE: We investigated the effect of our quality control (QC) program on the management strategy, completeness of the surgery, and clinical outcomes in advanced ovarian cancer. METHODS: A retrospective review of medical records from January 2005 to December 2019 identified 129 patients with advanced ovarian cancer. Cases were categorized into group 1 (2005-2013) and group 2 (2014-2019) before and after implementation of the QC program. Comparisons included clinicopathological variables, operative details, recurrence and survival outcomes. RESULTS: In Group 2 (n=44), after QC program implementation, primary debulking surgery (PDS) decreased (87.1% vs. 63.6%) and interval debulking surgery (IDS) increased (12.9% vs. 36.4%), indicating a shift in surgical strategy. Optimal resection rates improved significantly for PDS in group 2 (50.0% to 75.0%, p=0.007) and remained high for IDS in both groups (81.8% vs. 81.3%, p>0.999). Post-QC, advanced debulking procedures and co-operation with other departments increased in the IDS (p<0.05). Intra/post-operative complication rates were statistically comparable (p>0.05), whereas postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter in group 2 (17 days vs. 22 days, p=0.001). Median recurrence-free survival increased after QC, although not statistically significant (19.18 months vs. 25.38 months, p=0.855). CONCLUSION: With QC program, treatment strategies and clinical outcomes were significantly improved in advanced ovarian cancer. Systematic QC monitoring program should be considered as routine surveillance for better surgical outcomes.

Complete elimination of hyperleukocytosis risk in AML through early high-quality disease remission.

Background: Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) with hyperleukocytosis (HL) is a severe medical emergency associated with high mortality rates and poor prognosis. Prompt and urgent treatment is crucial to address this medical emergency. This study aims to elucidate appropriate diagnostic thresholds for HL and investigate underlying mechanisms and potential targeted therapies. Methods: X-tile software was employed to analyze white blood cell (WBC) count thresholds in AML patients using data from TCGA and TARGET AML databases. METASCAPE and Gene Set Enrichment Analysis (GSEA) were conducted to explore the molecular mechanisms underlying HL in AML. Potential molecular targeted drugs were identified using the CELLMINER platform. Results: Analysis revealed that a WBC count threshold of 75×109/L, rather than the conventional 100×109/L, is more appropriate for diagnosing HL in adult AML patients. This revised threshold could aid clinicians in identifying a greater number of patients requiring immediate intervention. Significant correlations were observed between HL and specific mutations, including NPM1, FLT3, and DNMT3A. For pediatric AML patients, the HL threshold was determined to be 165×109/L. Achieving complete remission (CR) or deeper levels of remission significantly reduces the risks associated with HL. The reduction in risk can lead to survival outcomes for HL patients that are comparable to those of non-hyperleukocytosis patients. Differential gene expression analysis indicated that downregulation of cell adhesion molecules is implicated in HL pathogenesis. Potential targeted therapies for AML with HL include Bcl2 inhibitors and histone deacetylase inhibitors. Clinical observations demonstrated that the addition of Bcl2 inhibitors, such as Venetoclax, to standard therapy results in a rapid reduction in WBC counts, thereby reducing tumor burden and providing prompt symptom relief. Combining these targeted drugs with conventional therapies appears promising in mitigating risks associated with HL. Conclusions: Lower diagnostic thresholds for HL in AML, identifies critical genetic correlations, and highlights effective molecular targeted therapies. Proactive early treatment is crucial for achieving deep remission and reducing HL risk. Future therapeutic strategies should consider integrating molecular targeted drugs with conventional therapies to improve outcomes for patients facing this high-risk hematological emergency.

Radical cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in the treatment of peritoneal sarcomatosis: Results from a reference center and considerations based on current evidence.

INTRODUCTION: Peritoneal sarcomatosis is a rare disease, with multiple histological origins and poor overall prognosis. The option of radical cytoreductive surgery (CRS) with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is controversial. The results of a surgical team experienced in these procedures are analyzed and discussed based on the available evidence. METHODS: Study on a prospective database of patients with peritoneal sarcomatosis who underwent CRS and HIPEC, from 2016 to 2022, in a national reference center for sarcomas and peritoneal oncological surgery, who met the established inclusion/exclusion criteria. RESULTS: 23 patients were included in the study, with a median age of 53 years (6-68). Recurrent/persistent clinical presentation predominated (78.3%). Visceral origin (including GIST and non-GIST peritoneal) accounted for 47.8% of patients, compared to 43.5% uterine and 8.7% retroperitoneal. The median PCI was 17 (3-36), with CC0 cytoreduction of 87%. Postoperative morbidity (Dindo Clavien III-IV) of 13%, with no postoperative mortality in the series. Overall survival and disease-free survival at 5 years were 64% and 34%, respectively. Histological grade was the most influential prognostic factor for survival. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the series, with low morbidity, support the benefit of radical peritoneal oncological surgery in patients with peritoneal sarcomatosis after adequate selection, as long as it is performed in high-volume centers, experienced surgeons and expert multidisciplinary teams. However, the role of HIPEC remains to be demonstrated and pending future studies.

Optimizing patient selection for secondary cytoreductive surgery in recurrent endometrial cancer.

OBJECTIVE: This retrospective, multicenter, observational study aimed to refine patient selection criteria for secondary cytoreductive surgery in recurrent endometrial cancer. The objective was to identify preoperative predictors of complete cytoreduction, assess surgical complexity, and propose a preoperative predictive scoring system to identify suitable candidates for secondary cytoreductive surgery. METHODS: Data from 331 women with recurrent endometrial cancer were analyzed across three Italian centers from January 2010 to December 2021. Patients were categorized based on treatment received (medical treatment, diagnostic laparoscopy/examination under anesthesia, or secondary cytoreductive surgery). Preoperative predictors, surgical complexity, complications, and a predictive scoring system were assessed. Logistic regression and receiver operating characteristic analysis were used for statistical evaluation. RESULTS: Of the cohort, 56.2% underwent debulking surgery, 17.2% had diagnostic laparoscopy, and 26.6% received medical treatment. Patients undergoing secondary cytoreductive surgery were younger, with a lower body mass index, better performance status, and fewer comorbidities. Single site locoregional relapse was common in secondary cytoreductive surgery patients. Age <65 years, single site relapse, lymph node, and hematogenous relapse were independent predictors of complete cytoreduction. A predictive scoring system demonstrated a clear relationship between the score and the likelihood of complete cytoreduction. CONCLUSION: This study identified age <65 years, single site recurrence, as well as nodal and hematogenous recurrence, as predictive factors for achieving optimal cytoreduction. A predictive scoring system incorporating these factors has been proposed to identify optimal candidates for secondary cytoreductive surgery in recurrent endometrial cancer. The scoring system showed promising predictive accuracy and could aid in refining the decision making process, ensuring appropriate patient selection for secondary cytoreductive surgery. Further prospective studies are warranted to validate and enhance the predictive model.

Assessment of Intraoperative Scoring Systems for Predicting Cytoreduction Outcome in Peritoneal Metastatic Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) is a widely acknowledged treatment approach for peritoneal metastasis, showing favorable prognosis and long-term survival. Intraoperative scoring systems quantify tumoral burden before CRS and may predict complete cytoreduction (CC). This study reviews the intraoperative scoring systems for predicting CC and optimal cytoreduction (OC) and evaluates the predictive performance of the Peritoneal Cancer Index (PCI) and Predictive Index Value (PIV). METHODS: Systematic searches were conducted in Embase, MEDLINE, and Web of Science. Meta-analyses of extracted data were performed to compare the absolute predictive performances of PCI and PIV. RESULTS: Thirty-eight studies (5834 patients) focusing on gynecological (n = 34; 89.5%), gastrointestinal (n = 2; 5.3%) malignancies, and on tumors of various origins (n = 2; 5.3%) were identified. Seventy-seven models assessing the predictive performance of scoring systems (54 for CC and 23 for OC) were identified with PCI (n = 39/77) and PIV (n = 16/77) being the most common. Twenty models (26.0%) reinterpreted previous scoring systems of which ten (13%) used a modified version of PIV (reclassification). Meta-analyses of models predicting CC based on PCI (n = 21) and PIV (n = 8) provided an AUC estimate of 0.83 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.79-0.86; Q = 119.6, p = 0.0001; I2 = 74.1%) and 0.74 (95% CI 0.68-0.81; Q = 7.2, p = 0.41; I2 = 11.0%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Peritoneal Cancer Index models demonstrate an excellent estimate of CC, while PIV shows an acceptable performance. There is a need for high-quality studies to address management differences, establish standardized cutoff values, and focus on non-gynecological malignancies.

Defining the role of surgery for patients with multiple brain metastases.

PURPOSE: To better define the role of surgery, we investigated survival and functional outcomes in patients with multiple brain metastases. METHODS: Pertinent clinical and radiological data of 131 consecutive patients (156 surgeries) were analyzed retrospectively. RESULTS: Surgical indications included mass effect (84.6%) and need for tissue acquisition (44.9%, for molecularly informed treatment: 10 patients). Major (i.e. CTCAE grade 3-5) neurological, surgical and medical complication were observed in 6 (3.8%), 12 (7.7%), and 12 (7.7%) surgical cases. Median preoperative and discharge KPS were 80% (IQF: 60-90%). Median overall survival (mOS) was 7.4 months. However, estimated 1 and 2 year overall survival rates were 35.6% and 25.1%, respectively. Survival was dismal (i.e. mOS ≤ 2.5 months) in patients who had no postoperative radio- and systemic therapy, or who incurred major complications. Multivariate analysis with all parameters significantly correlated with survival as univariate parameters revealed female sex, oligometastases, no major new/worsened neurological deficits, and postoperative radio- and systemic therapy as independent positive prognostic parameters. Univariate positive prognostic parameters also included histology (best survival in breast cancer patients) and less than median (0.28 cm3) residual tumor load. CONCLUSIONS: Surgery is a reasonable therapeutic option in many patients with multiple brain metastases. Operations should primarily aim at reducing mass effect thereby preserving the patients' functional health status which will allow for further local (radiation) and systemic therapy. Surgery for the acquisition of metastatic tissue (more recently for molecularly informed treatment) is another important surgical indication. Cytoreductive surgery may also carry a survival benefit by itself.

Real-life use of ropeg-interferon α2b in polycythemia vera: patient selection and clinical outcomes.

Ropeginterferon-alfa2b (ropegIFNα2b) is a long-acting IFN formulation with broad FDA/EMA approval as a therapy of polycythemia vera (PV) with no symptomatic splenomegaly. There is currently lack of information on the real-world patient selection, including the impact of local reimbursement policies, and drug management, particularly: type/timing of screening and follow-up tests; absolute/relative contraindications to therapy; ropegIFNα2b dose and combinations with hydroxyurea. As a sub-analysis of the PV-ARC retrospective study (NCT06134102), we here report our monocenter experience with ropegIFNα2b in the period from January 2021, corresponding to drug availability outside clinical trial, and December 2023. Among the 149 patients with EMA/FDA indication, only 55 (36.9%) met the local reimbursement criteria and 18 (12.1%) received ropegIFNα2b. Thanks to appropriate screening, relative/absolute contraindications to ropegIFNα2b were detected and managed in a multidisciplinary manner. Efficacy and safety of ropegIFNα2b was confirmed, with 3 cases of early molecular response. General use of low ropegIFNα2b dose, with frequent need for hydroxyurea combinations, was noted. This real-world experience suggests a significant impact of local regulations on drug prescription and the need for greater real-world data collection on ropegIFNα2b in PV patients. Also, it describes appropriate multidisciplinary screening and monitoring procedures during ropegIFNα2b therapy.

Multidisciplinary systemic and local therapies for metastatic renal cell carcinoma: a narrative review.

INTRODUCTION: Systemic and local therapies for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) are often challenging despite the evolution of multimodal cancer therapies in the last decade. In this review, we will focus on recent multidisciplinary approaches for patients with mRCC. AREAS COVERED: Systemic therapies for patients with mRCC have been garnering attention particularly after the approval of immuno-oncology (IO) agents, including anti-programmed death 1/programmed death-ligand 1. IO combinations have significantly prolonged overall survival in patients with mRCC in the first-line setting. Regarding local therapies, cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN) has become less common in the post-Cancer du Rein Metastatique Nephrectomie et Antiangiogéniques (CARMENA) trial era, even though CN may still benefit selected patients with mRCC. In addition, metastasis-directed local therapies, namely metastasectomy or stereotactic radiotherapy, particularly for oligo-metastatic lesions or brain metastases, may have a prognostic impact. Several ablative techniques are also evolving while maintaining high local control rates with acceptable safety. EXPERT OPINION: Multimodal cancer therapies are essential for conquering complex cases of mRCC. Modern systemic therapies including IO-based combination therapy as well as local therapies including CN, metastasectomy, stereotactic radiotherapy, and ablative techniques appear to improve oncologic outcomes of patients with mRCC, although appropriate patient selection is indispensable.

Trends in specific procedures performed at the time of cytoreduction for ovarian cancer: Is interval debulking surgery truly less radical? A Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center Team Ovary study.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate procedures performed during primary debulking surgery (PDS) and interval debulking surgery (IDS) for ovarian cancer. METHODS: Patients surgically treated at our institution for newly diagnosed stage IIIC/IV epithelial ovarian cancer between 6/1/2015-12/31/2021 were identified using a prospectively collected database. Patients were triaged to PDS or neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) followed by IDS using an institutional algorithm. Data on specific procedures performed, including consultants called, were collected from operative and pathology reports. Appropriate statistical analyses were applied. RESULTS: Overall, 467 patients underwent PDS and 434 underwent IDS; 76% (PDS) and 71% (IDS) of cases achieved complete gross resection. Comparing PDS vs IDS cohorts, median age was 63 years (range, 23-86) vs 67 years (range, 35-95), 79% vs 86% of patients had high-grade serous histology, and 38% vs 70% had stage IV disease. Most procedures (except ostomy, distal pancreatectomy) were more common during PDS (P < .05). Bowel surgery was performed during 65% of PDS and 33% of IDS, and upper abdominal surgery during 72% of PDS and 52% of IDS; both were more common during PDS (P < .001). Estimated blood loss (median, 500 mL [PDS] vs 300 mL [IDS]) and operative time (median, 362 min [PDS] vs 267 min [IDS]) were higher for PDS (P < .001). A consulting surgeon was utilized during 31% of PDS and 18% of IDS, with hepatopancreaticobiliary as the most commonly called service (61% and 65%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: In our study of patients with advanced-stage ovarian cancer, while most procedures were more often performed during PDS, NACT did not obviate the need for radical surgical resection. Thus, advanced surgical skills remain essential.

Continuity Unveiled: Evaluating Cytoreduction Outcomes for Advanced Ovarian Cancer Amidst the COVID-19 Era at an ESGO Designated Centre of Excellence.

BACKGROUND/AIM: The COVID-19 pandemic brought unprecedented global changes, necessitating adjustments to address public health challenges. The impact on advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) surgery, marked by increased perioperative risks, and changes in management plans was explored in this study based on promptly published British Gynaecologic Cancer Society (BGCS) and European Society of Gynaecologic Oncology (ESGO) guidelines. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Retrospective data from 332 patients with advanced EOC who underwent cytoreductive surgery at a UK tertiary center were analyzed, and the outcomes were compared between pre-COVID-19 (2018-2019) (n=189) and COVID-19 era (2020-2021) (n=143) cohorts, covering the same timeframe (March to December). Primary outcomes included residual disease (RD) and progression-free survival (PFS), while secondary outcomes were the ESGO quality indicators (QIs) for advanced EOC surgery. Kaplan-Meier curves were produced to illustrate PFS. RESULTS: Complete cytoreduction rates remained comparable at 74.07% and 72.03% for pre-COVID-19 and COVID-19 groups, respectively. Differences were observed in ECOG performance status (p=0.015), Intensive Care Unit (ICU) admissions (p=0.039) with less interval debulking surgeries (p=0.03), lower surgical complexity scores (p=0.02), and longer operative times in the COVID-19 group (p=0.01) compared to the pre-COVID-19 group. The median PFS rates were 37 months and 34 months in the pre-COVID-19 and COVID-19 groups, respectively (p=0.08). The surgical QIs 1-3 remained uncompromised during the COVID-19 era. CONCLUSION: Management modifications prompted by the COVID-19 pandemic did not adversely impact cytoreduction rates or PFS.

Effect of surgical volume on short-term outcomes of cytoreductive surgery for advanced-stage ovarian cancer: A population-based study from the Dutch Gynecological Oncology Audit.

OBJECTIVE: Despite lacking clinical data, the Dutch government is considering increasing the minimum annual surgical volume per center from twenty to fifty cytoreductive surgeries (CRS) for advanced-stage ovarian cancer (OC). This study aims to evaluate whether this increase is warranted. METHODS: This population-based study included all CRS for FIGO-stage IIB-IVB OC registered in eighteen Dutch hospitals between 2019 and 2022. Short-term outcomes included result of CRS, length of stay, severe complications, 30-day mortality, time to adjuvant chemotherapy, and textbook outcome. Patients were stratified by annual volume: low-volume (nine hospitals, <25), medium-volume (four hospitals, 29-37), and high-volume (five hospitals, 54-84). Descriptive statistics and multilevel logistic regressions were used to assess the (case-mix adjusted) associations of surgical volume and outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 1646 interval CRS (iCRS) and 789 primary CRS (pCRS) were included. No associations were found between surgical volume and different outcomes in the iCRS cohort. In the pCRS cohort, high-volume was associated with increased complete CRS rates (aOR 1.9, 95%-CI 1.2-3.1, p = 0.010). Furthermore, high-volume was associated with increased severe complication rates (aOR 2.3, 1.1-4.6, 95%-CI 1.3-4.2, p = 0.022) and prolonged length of stay (aOR 2.3, 95%-CI 1.3-4.2, p = 0.005). 30-day mortality, time to adjuvant chemotherapy, and textbook outcome were not associated with surgical volume in the pCRS cohort. Subgroup analyses (FIGO-stage IIIC-IVB) showed similar results. Various case-mix factors significantly impacted outcomes, warranting case-mix adjustment. CONCLUSIONS: Our analyses do not support further centralization of iCRS for advanced-stage OC. High-volume was associated with higher complete pCRS, suggesting either a more accurate selection in these hospitals or a more aggressive approach. The higher completeness rates were at the expense of higher severe complications and prolonged admissions.

Prognostic value of molecular classification in stage IV endometrial cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Multiple studies have proven the prognostic value of molecular classification for stage I-III endometrial cancer patients. However, studies on the relevance of molecular classification for stage IV endometrial cancer patients are lacking. Hypothetically, poor prognostic molecular subtypes are more common in higher stages of endometrial cancer. Considering the poor prognosis of stage IV endometrial cancer patients, it is questionable whether molecular classification has additional prognostic value. Therefore, we determined which molecular subclasses are found in stage IV endometrial cancer and if there is a correlation with progression-free and overall survival. METHODS: A retrospective multicenter cohort study was conducted using data from five Dutch hospitals. Patients with stage IV endometrial cancer at diagnosis who were treated with primary cytoreductive surgery or cytoreductive surgery after induction chemotherapy between January 2000 and December 2018 were included. Exclusion criteria were age <18 years or recurrent disease. The molecular classification was performed centrally on all tumor samples according to the World Health Organization 2020 classification (including POLE and estrogen receptor status). The Kaplan-Meier method was used to calculate progression free and overall survival in the molecular subclasses, for the different histological subtypes and for estrogen receptor positive versus estrogen receptor negative tumors. Groups were compared using the log-rank test. RESULTS: 164 stage IV endometrial cancer patients were molecularly classified. Median age of the patients was 67 years (range 33-86). Most patients presented with a non-endometrioid histological subtype (58%). Intra-abdominal complete cytoreductive surgery was achieved in 60.4% of the patients. 101 tumors (61.6%) were classified as p53 abnormal, 35 (21.3%) as no specific molecular profile, 21 (12.8%) as mismatch repair deficient, and 6 (3%) as POLE mutated. Molecular classification had no significant impact on progression free (p=0.056) or overall survival (p=0.12) after cytoreductive surgery. Overall survival was affected by histologic subtype (p<0.0001) and estrogen receptor status (p=0.013). CONCLUSION: The distribution of the molecular subclasses in stage IV endometrial cancer patients differed substantially from the distribution in stage I-III endometrial cancer patients, with the unfavorable subclasses being more frequently present. Although the molecular classification was not prognostic in stage IV endometrial cancer, it could guide adjuvant treatment decisions.