Real-world clinical practice patterns and outcomes for advanced ovarian cancer in Spain (GEICO-42-R study)

Objective: To assess epidemiological, pathological and clinical characteristics, therapeutic management patterns and outcomes in the management of advanced ovarian cancer (AOC) in clinical practice. Methods: Multicenter, retrospective, epidemiological, observational real-world study reviewing clinical records from 277 patients diagnosed with AOC between January 2008 and December 2010 who were treated and followed in 31 Spanish hospitals belonging to the Spanish Ovarian Cancer Research Group (GEICO). Survival curves were estimated by Kaplan–Meier and differences analyzed by the log-rank test. Results: Median age at diagnosis was 62 years (range 26–96), 62% of patients had a high-grade serous carcinoma, and 64% and 21% of patients had stage IIIC and stage IV disease, respectively. Overall, 46% of patients underwent primary debulking surgery (PDS), with complete cytoreduction in 63% of procedures, and 34% underwent interval debulking surgery, with complete cytoreduction in 71% of them. Overall, 96% of patients received at least one cycle of front-line chemotherapy. Recurrence occurred in 77% of patients, and 90% of them (69% of total) received a second-line chemotherapy. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 14 months (95% CI: 13–17) and median overall survival (OS) was 41 months (95% CI: 34–49). PDS and complete cytoreduction had a statistically significant correlation with PFS and OS. Conclusions: This retrospective study provides real-world data of clinical characteristics, therapeutic management, and outcomes in Spanish AOC patients. Primary debulking surgery and complete cytoreduction were favorable prognostic factors in this series.

Ovarian cancer; Real-world data; Primary debulking surgery; Complete cytoreduction

[1] Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, Laversanne M, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A, et al. Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians. 2021; 71: 209–249.

[2] Narod S. Can advanced-stage ovarian cancer be cured? Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology. 2016; 13: 255–261.

[3] González Martín A, Redondo A, Jurado M, De Juan A, Romero I, Bover I, et al. GEICO (Spanish Group for Investigation on Ovarian Cancer) treatment guidelines in ovarian cancer 2012. Clinical and Translational Oncology. 2013; 15: 509–525.

[4] Mahmood RD, Morgan RD, Edmondson RJ, Clamp AR, Jayson GC. First-Line Management of Advanced High-Grade Serous Ovarian Cancer. Current Oncology Reports. 2020; 22: 64.

[5] Colombo N, Sessa C, Bois AD, Ledermann J, McCluggage W, Mc- Neish I, et al. ESMO-ESGO consensus conference recommendations on ovarian cancer: pathology and molecular biology, early and advanced stages, borderline tumours and recurrent disease. Annals of Oncology. 2019; 30: 672–705.

[6] Bookman MA, Tyczynski JE, Espirito JL, Wilson TW, Fernandes AW. Impact of primary platinum-free interval and BRCA1/2 mutation status on treatment and survival in patients with recurrent ovarian cancer. Gynecologic Oncology. 2017; 146: 58–63.

[7] Hall M, Savvatis K, Nixon K, Kyrgiou M, Hariharan K, Padwick M, et al. Maximal-Effort Cytoreductive Surgery for Ovarian Cancer Patients with a High Tumor Burden: Variations in Practice and Impact on Outcome. Annals of Surgical Oncology. 2019; 26: 2943–2951.

[8] Gao Y, Li Y, Zhang C, Han J, Liang H, Zhang K, et al. Evaluating the benefits of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for advanced epithelial ovarian cancer: a retrospective study. Journal of Ovarian Research. 2019; 12: 85.

[9] Chiva L, Lapuente F, Castellanos T, Alonso S, Gonzalez-Martin A. What should we Expect after a Complete Cytoreduction at the Time of Interval or Primary Debulking Surgery in Advanced Ovarian Cancer? Annals of Surgical Oncology. 2016; 23: 1666– 1673.

[10] Horowitz NS, Miller A, Rungruang B, Richard SD, Rodriguez N, Bookman MA, et al. Does aggressive surgery improve outcomes? Interaction between preoperative disease burden and complex surgery in patients with advanced-stage ovarian cancer: an analysis of GOG 182. Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2015; 33: 937–943.

[11] Vergote I, Coens C, Nankivell M, Kristensen GB, Parmar MKB, Ehlen T, et al. Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Versus Debulking Surgery in Advanced Tubo-Ovarian Cancers: Pooled Analysis of Individual Patient Data from the EORTC 55971 and CHORUS Trials. Lancet Oncology. 2018; 19: 1680–1687.

[12] Onda T, Satoh T, Ogawa G, Saito T, Kasamatsu T, Nakanishi T, et al. Comparison of survival between primary debulking surgery and neoadjuvant chemotherapy for stage III/IV ovarian, tubal and peritoneal cancers in phase III randomised trial. European Journal of Cancer. 2020; 130: 114–125.

[13] Lin JJ, Egorova N, Franco R, Prasad-Hayes M, Bickell NA. Ovar- ian Cancer Treatment and Survival Trends among Women Older than 65 Years of Age in the United States, 1995-2008. Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2016; 127: 81–89.

[14] Vergote I, Tropé CG, Amant F, Kristensen GB, Ehlen T, Johnson N, et al. Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy or Primary Surgery in Stage IIIC or IV Ovarian Cancer. New England Journal of Medicine. 2010; 363: 943–953.

[15] du Bois A, Reuss A, Pujade-Lauraine E, Harter P, Ray-Coquard I, Pfisterer J. Role of surgical outcome as prognostic factor in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer: a combined exploratory analysis of 3 prospectively randomized phase 3 multicenter trials Role of surgical outcome as prognostic factor in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer: a combined exploratory analysis of 3 prospectively randomized phase 3 multicenter trials: by the Arbeitsgemein-schaft Gynaekologische Onkologie Studiengruppe Ovarialkarzinom (AGO-OVAR) and the Groupe d’Investigateurs Nationaux Pour les Etudes des Cancers de l’Ovaire (GINECO). Cancer. 2009; 115: 1234–1244.

[16] Kehoe S, Hook J, Nankivell M, Jayson GC, Kitchener H, Lopes T, et al. Primary chemotherapy versus primary surgery for newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer (CHORUS): an open-label, randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial. Lancet. 2015; 386: 249– 257.

[17] Earle CC, Schrag D, Neville BA, Yabroff KR, Topor M, Fahey A, et al. Effect of surgeon specialty on processes of care and outcomes for ovarian cancer patients. Journal of the National Cancer Insti- tute. 2006; 98: 172–180.

[18] Rim SH, Hirsch S, Thomas CC, Brewster WR, Cooney D, Thompson TD, et al. Gynecologic oncologists involvement on ovarian cancer standard of care receipt and survival. World Journal of Ob- stetrics and Gynecology. 2016; 5: 187–196.

[19] Moore K, Colombo N, Scambia G, Kim B, Oaknin A, Friedlan- der M, et al. Maintenance Olaparib in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Advanced Ovarian Cancer. The New England Journal of Medicine. 2018; 379: 2495–2505.

[20] González-Martín A, Pothuri B, Vergote I. PRIMA/ENGOT-OV26/GOG-3012 Investigators. Niraparib in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Advanced Ovarian Cancer. New England Journal of Medicine. 2019; 381: 2391–2402.

[21] Ray-Coquard I, Pautier P, Pignata S, Pérol D, González-Martín A, Berger R, et al. Olaparib plus Bevacizumab as First-Line Maintenance in Ovarian Cancer. New England Journal of Medicine. 2019; 381: 2416–2428.

[22] Du Bois A, Sehouli J, Vergote I, Ferron G, Reuss A, Meier W, et al. Randomized phase III study to evaluate the impact of secondary cytoreductive surgery in recurrent ovarian cancer: Final analysis of AGO DESKTOP III/ENGOT-ov20. Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2020; 38: 6000.

[23] Krivak TC, Lele S, Richard S, Secord AA, Leath CA, Brower SL, et al. A chemoresponse assay for prediction of platinum resistance in primary ovarian cancer. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2014; 211: 68.e1–68.e8.

[24] Petrillo M, Fagotti A, Ferrandina G, Fanfani F, Costantini B, Vizzielli G, et al. Ovarian cancer patients with localized relapse: clinical outcome and prognostic factors. Gynecologic Oncology. 2013; 131: 36–41.

[25] Colombo N. Optimising the treatment of the partially platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer patient. European Journal of Cancer Supplements. 2014; 12: 7–12.