Predictors of survival in patients with recurrent ovarian cancer undergoing secondary cytoreductive surgery based on the pooled analysis of an international collaborative cohort

115Citations
Citations of this article
60Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: This study aims to identify prognostic factors and to develop a risk model predicting survival in patients undergoing secondary cytoreductive surgery (SCR) for recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer. Methods: Individual data of 1100 patients with recurrent ovarian cancer of a progression-free interval at least 6 months who underwent SCR were pooled analysed. A simplified scoring system for each independent prognostic factor was developed according to its coefficient. Internal validation was performed to assess the discrimination of the model. Results: Complete SCR was strongly associated with the improvement of survival, with a median survival of 57.7 months, when compared with 27.0 months in those with residual disease of 0.1-1 cm and 15.6 months in those with residual disease of > 1 cm, respectively (P<0.0001). Progression-free interval (≤23.1 months vs >23.1 months, hazard ratio (HR): 1.72; score: 2), ascites at recurrence (present vs absent, HR: 1.27; score: 1), extent of recurrence (multiple vs localised disease, HR: 1.38; score: 1) as well as residual disease after SCR (R1 vs R0, HR: 1.90, score: 2; R2 vs R0, HR: 3.0, score: 4) entered into the risk model. Conclusion: This prognostic model may provide evidence to predict survival benefit from secondary cytoreduction in patients with recurrent ovarian cancer. © 2011 Cancer Research UK All rights reserved.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Zang, R. Y., Harter, P., Chi, D. S., Sehouli, J., Jiang, R., Tropé, C. G., … Berek, J. S. (2011). Predictors of survival in patients with recurrent ovarian cancer undergoing secondary cytoreductive surgery based on the pooled analysis of an international collaborative cohort. British Journal of Cancer, 105(7), 890–896. https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2011.328

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free