Primary cytoreductive surgery with or without hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) for FIGO stage III epithelial ovarian cancer: OVHIPEC-2, a phase III randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND: The addition of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) to interval cytoreductive surgery improves recurrence-free and overall survival in patients with FIGO stage III ovarian cancer who are ineligible for primary cytoreductive surgery. The effect of HIPEC remains undetermined in patients who are candidates for primary cytoreductive surgery. PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: The primary objective is to evaluate the effect of HIPEC on overall survival in patients with FIGO stage III epithelial ovarian cancer who are treated with primary cytoreductive surgery resulting in no residual disease, or residual disease up to 2.5 mm in maximum dimension. STUDY HYPOTHESIS: We hypothesize that the addition of HIPEC to primary cytoreductive surgery improves overall survival in patients with primary FIGO stage III epithelial ovarian cancer. TRIAL DESIGN: This international, randomized, open-label, phase III trial will enroll 538 patients with newly diagnosed FIGO stage III epithelial ovarian cancer. Following complete or near-complete (residual disease ≤2.5 mm) primary cytoreduction, patients are randomly allocated (1:1) to receive HIPEC or no HIPEC. All patients will receive six courses of platinum-paclitaxel chemotherapy, and maintenance PARP-inhibitor or bevacizumab according to current guidelines. MAJOR ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Patients with FIGO stage III primary epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer are eligible after complete or near-complete primary cytoreductive surgery. Patients with resectable umbilical, spleen, or local bowel lesions may be included. Enlarged extra-abdominal lymph nodes should be negative on FDG-PET or fine-needle aspiration/biopsy. PRIMARY ENDPOINT: The primary endpoint is overall survival. SAMPLE SIZE: To detect a HR of 0.67 in favor of HIPEC, 200 overall survival events are required. With an expected accrual period of 60 months and 12 months additional follow-up, 538 patients need to be randomized. ESTIMATED DATES FOR COMPLETING ACCRUAL AND PRESENTING RESULTS: The OVHIPEC-2 trial started in January 2020 and primary analyses are anticipated in 2026. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov:NCT03772028

Lymphadenectomy in surgical stage I epithelial ovarian cancer

Abstract Objective. To identify the extent of lymphadenectomy performed in women presenting with epithelial ovarian cancer macroscopically confined to the ovary. Furthermore, the effect of lymphadenectomy on overall survival is evaluated

Stage at diagnosis and ovarian cancer survival: evidence from the International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership.

OBJECTIVE: We investigate what role stage at diagnosis bears in international differences in ovarian cancer survival. METHODS: Data from population-based cancer registries in Australia, Canada, Denmark, Norway, and the UK were analysed for 20,073 women diagnosed with ovarian cancer during 2004-07. We compare the stage distribution between countries and estimate stage-specific one-year net survival and the excess hazard up to 18 months after diagnosis, using flexible parametric models on the log cumulative excess hazard scale. RESULTS: One-year survival was 69% in the UK, 72% in Denmark and 74-75% elsewhere. In Denmark, 74% of patients were diagnosed with FIGO stages III-IV disease, compared to 60-70% elsewhere. International differences in survival were evident at each stage of disease; women in the UK had lower survival than in the other four countries for patients with FIGO stages III-IV disease (61.4% vs. 65.8-74.4%). International differences were widest for older women and for those with advanced stage or with no stage data. CONCLUSION: Differences in stage at diagnosis partly explain international variation in ovarian cancer survival, and a more adverse stage distribution contributes to comparatively low survival in Denmark. This could arise because of differences in tumour biology, staging procedures or diagnostic delay. Differences in survival also exist within each stage, as illustrated by lower survival for advanced disease in the UK, suggesting unequal access to optimal treatment. Population-based data on cancer survival by stage are vital for cancer surveillance, and global consensus is needed to make stage data in cancer registries more consistent