Importance of delivered cycles and nomogram for intraperitoneal chemotherapy in ovarian cancer. A comparison of intravenous versus intraperitoneal chemotherapy for the initial treatment of ovarian cancer. A comparative study of intraperitoneal carboplatin versus intravenous carboplatin with intravenous cyclophosphamide in both arms as initial chemotherapy for stage III ovarian cancer. Intraperitoneal cisplatin-based chemotherapy vs. intravenous cisplatin-based chemotherapy for stage III optimally cytoreduced epithelial ovarian cancer. Randomized trial of adjuvant intraperitoneal alpha-interferon in stage III ovarian cancer patients who have no evidence of disease after primary surgery and chemotherapy: An intergroup study. Intraperitoneal cisplatin and paclitaxel in ovarian cancer. Medical Research Council study on chemotherapy in advanced ovarian cancer. Medical Research Council's Working Party on ovarian cancer. Phase III trial of standard-dose intravenous cisplatin plus paclitaxel versus moderately high-dose carboplatin followed by intravenous paclitaxel and intraperitoneal cisplatin in small-volume stage III ovarian carcinoma: an intergroup study of the Gynecologic Oncology Group, Southwestern Oncology Group, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. [Polychemotherapy of ovarian cancer via combined intravenous and intraperitoneal routes. Technic and preliminary results].
Intraperitoneal (IP) chemotherapy has gained enthusiasm in the treatment of ovarian cancer. Despite having a better survival advantage than intravenous (IV) chemotherapy, IP chemotherapy still poses significant morbidity and complications. Identifying the subset of patients who could best benefit from IP chemotherapy, and those who would least benefit from this treatment, thus avoiding potential complications, is critical.
                Between January 2001 and December 2007, 367 patients with stage III epithelial ovarian cancer underwent randomized trial for IP/IV chemotherapy were recruited to construct a nomogram, which is a graphical representation of Cox proportional hazards model adopting six weighted risk factors including age, CA125, IP/IV delivery, stage, histology, and upper abdominal metastases. The nomogram was internally validated for discrimination and calibration. The concordance index was used for quantifying the predictive ability of overall survival with bootstrapping to correct for bias.
                The cycles of completed IP chemotherapy had an impact on overall survival (> or =5 vs. < or =4 cycles, P=0.02). A nomogram for predicting median survival and 5-year survival probability was constructed with a concordance index of 0.72. Upper abdominal tumor metastases (P<0.001) and colon resection (P=0.02) predicted increased chances for early discontinuation of IP chemotherapy.
                At least five IP cycles are needed to achieve better survival. Nomogram can help to identify the subset of patients who can least benefit from IP chemotherapy, thus avoiding potential IP complications and help to facilitate discussion between patient and physician, risk stratification, and help to guide clinical care. A phase III study was conducted comparing intraperitoneal (ip) versus intravenous (iv) cisplatin-based therapy for patients with newly diagnosed ovarian cancer to determine if the pharmacologic advantage of ip delivery could be translated into an improved response and survival rate. Twenty-nine patients were randomized to receive six cycles of ip cisplatin 200 mg/m2 plus ip etoposide 350 mg/m2 with iv thiosulfate protection given every 4 weeks; thirty-three patients were randomized to receive six cycles of iv cisplatin 100 mg/m2 plus iv cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m2 administered every 3 weeks. Patients were stratified by stage (IIC-IV) and size of residual disease (> or < or = 1 cm). The study was conducted in a community-wide setting. The complete response in evaluable patients was 48% in the ip group and 52% in the iv group. The surgical complete response rate for all patients on study, underestimated because not all patients in complete clinical remission had a second-look laparotomy, was 31% in the ip group and 33% in the iv group. There was no difference in the response rates between the treatment arms as a function of residual disease < or = or > 1 cm. With a median follow-up of 46 months (range 21-70 months) there is no difference in response duration or survival. Both regimens were well tolerated with comparable hematologic and nonhematologic toxicity. Cisplatin (C) or carboplatin (CBP) plus cyclophosphamide (CTX) was until recently considered standard chemotherapy for advanced ovarian cancer (OC). Attempts to maximize platinum and its analog activity against OC include its administration directly into the peritoneal cavity. In the past we have shown that intraperitoneal (IP) CBP administration is a safe and effective treatment for OC [Polyzos et al: Proc Am Assoc Cancer Res 1990;31: 1120]. In the present study we aimed to compare the effectiveness and toxicity of CBP administration either intravenously (IV) or IP plus CTX IV. Since 1990, 90 evaluable patients with stage III OC were prospectively randomized to receive CBP 350 mg/m2 IV or IP plus CTX 600 mg/m2 IV (in both groups) every 3-4 weeks for six courses. The randomization incorporated stratification according to performance status and the amount of residual tumor (maximum diameter </=2 or >2 cm). Clinical assessment was performed with abdominal CT and serum CA-125. Responses were observed in 33/46 = 72% (95/CI 56.5-84.0) of the IV group and in 33/44 = 75% (95/CI 59.7-86.8) of the IP group with 48 and 45% clinical complete responses, respectively. Times to progression were 19 months (8-62+) for the IV group and 18 (6-72+) for the IP group. Median survivals were: 25 months (6-80+) and 26 months (6-72+), respectively. Significantly more patients in the IV group than in the IP group had grade 3 or higher leukopenia (p < 0. 01) and grade 3 thrombocytopenia (p < 0.09). Morbidity due to infectious complications in the IP group was minimal. It seems that IP CBP is equally effective to IV administration in terms of response and survival with less myelotoxicity. The favorable results on survival demonstrated in studies with IP C administration in patients with small volume disease [Alberts et al: N Engl J Med 1996;335:1950-1965] could not be repeated in the present study applying CBP in patients with variable tumor size and a relatively small number of patients. The likelihood that patients with large volume disease would benefit from a regional approach compared to systemic administration is small and this explains the inability to detect a difference between the two arms. To compare the survival between intraperitoneal cisplatin-based chemotherapy (IPCT) and intravenous cisplatin-based chemotherapy (IVCT) in stage III epithelial ovarian cancer with minimal residual disease (<1 cm) after primary debulking surgery.
                One hundred and thirty-two patients with stage III epithelial ovarian cancer after optimal primary debulking surgery with minimal residual disease between April 1990 and March 1995 were entered into a randomized clinical trial in which IPCT or IVCT was administered at 3-week intervals. Patients in the IPCT arm received cisplatin-based (100 mg/m(2)) intraperitoneal chemotherapy. Patients in the IVCT arm received cisplatin-based (50 mg/m(2)) intravenous chemotherapy. The tumor response was assessed every 3 months. The hematological toxicity using the South West Oncology Group (SWOG) toxicity criteria was assessed. Catheter complications associated with intraperitoneal chemotherapy were also analyzed.
                The estimated median survival in the IPCT group was 43 months (95% confidence interval, 34-54) and IVCT group was 48 months (95% confidence interval, 37-59). The hazard ratio of death was not statistically significant between IPCT and IVCT (hazard ratio, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.69-1.86; P=0.317). The frequencies of hematological toxic effects were significantly lower in the IPCT group than in the IVCT group.
                Intravenous and intraperitoneal chemotherapy are associated with equivalent survival in patients with minimal residual stage III epithelial ovarian cancer after optimal cytoreductive surgery. Despite the improvement in progression-free and overall survival in patients with advanced ovarian cancer associated with platinum-taxane chemotherapy, strategies are needed to prevent the greater than 70% recurrence rate.
                The Southwest Oncology Group (SWOG) initiated a phase III intergroup trial of alpha-interferon (IFNalpha-26, Schering-Plough, Kenilworth, NJ) in weekly doses of 50 x 10(6) IU (for 6 doses) versus observation only in patients with no pathological evidence of residual disease at second-look surgery in 1988.
                Patient accrual was extremely slow and the trial was permanently closed in 1999 by the SWOG Data and Safety Monitoring Committee with 74 registered patients. Of these patients, 70 were evaluable for progression-free and overall survival. There was no significant difference between the two study arms in relation to median progression-free survival (P = 0.56). The median survival duration associated with intraperitoneal alpha-interferon had not been reached versus 87 months on the observation arm. In general, intraperitoneal alpha-interferon was well tolerated. There were no treatment-related deaths or grade 4 adverse events. Although no efficacy conclusions can be drawn from this prematurely closed trial, it should be noted that 57% of the patients on the observation arm recurred and all died, whereas 63% recurred and only 43% died on the intraperitoneal alpha-interferon arm.
                Although this was a negative study, there should continue to be interest in the use of biological therapy to improve survival of patients in complete remission following primary chemotherapy. Standard chemotherapy for newly diagnosed ovarian cancer is a platinum-taxane combination. The Gynecologic Oncology Group conducted a randomized, phase 3 trial that compared intravenous paclitaxel plus cisplatin with intravenous paclitaxel plus intraperitoneal cisplatin and paclitaxel in patients with stage III ovarian cancer.
                We randomly assigned patients with stage III ovarian carcinoma or primary peritoneal carcinoma with no residual mass greater than 1.0 cm to receive 135 mg of intravenous paclitaxel per square meter of body-surface area over a 24-hour period followed by either 75 mg of intravenous cisplatin per square meter on day 2 (intravenous-therapy group) or 100 mg of intraperitoneal cisplatin per square meter on day 2 and 60 mg of intraperitoneal paclitaxel per square meter on day 8 (intraperitoneal-therapy group). Treatment was given every three weeks for six cycles. Quality of life was assessed.
                Of 429 patients who underwent randomization, 415 were eligible. Grade 3 and 4 pain, fatigue, and hematologic, gastrointestinal, metabolic, and neurologic toxic effects were more common in the intraperitoneal-therapy group than in the intravenous-therapy group (P< or =0.001). Only 42 percent of the patients in the intraperitoneal-therapy group completed six cycles of the assigned therapy, but the median duration of progression-free survival in the intravenous-therapy and intraperitoneal-therapy groups was 18.3 and 23.8 months, respectively (P=0.05 by the log-rank test). The median duration of overall survival in the intravenous-therapy and intraperitoneal-therapy groups was 49.7 and 65.6 months, respectively (P=0.03 by the log-rank test). Quality of life was significantly worse in the intraperitoneal-therapy group before cycle 4 and three to six weeks after treatment but not one year after treatment.
                As compared with intravenous paclitaxel plus cisplatin, intravenous paclitaxel plus intraperitoneal cisplatin and paclitaxel improves survival in patients with optimally debulked stage III ovarian cancer.
                Copyright 2006 Massachusetts Medical Society. A total of 264 eligible patients with advanced ovarian cancer were randomised to single or triple agent cytotoxic therapy; 261 were available for analysis. The treatments were continuous oral cyclophosphamide (arm S), and a combination of oral cyclophosphamide, hexamethylmelamine and methotrexate on a pulsed basis (arm T). Mortality attributed to cancer was slightly lower on arm T (p = 0.06), but this was offset by the greater toxicity of this regimen, and overall survival and activity index were similar on the two arms. There was thus little evidence of greater clinical benefit on the triple agent regimen. Tumour mass removed at operation, extent of remaining tumour and age all showed significant correlation with prognosis. Survival was longer in patients whose disease responded to either therapeutic regimen. To compare the progression-free and overall survival in small-volume residual ovarian cancer after treatment with intravenous (IV) cisplatin and paclitaxel or an experimental regimen of IV carboplatin followed by IV paclitaxel and intraperitoneal cisplatin.
                Patients were randomized to receive either IV paclitaxel 135 mg/m(2) over 24 hours followed by IV cisplatin 75 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks for six courses or IV carboplatin (area under curve 9) every 28 days for two courses, then IV paclitaxel 135 mg/m(2) over 24 hours followed by intraperitoneal (IP) cisplatin 100 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks for six courses.
                Of the 523 patients who entered this trial, 462 were determined to be assessable, with prognostic factors well balanced between the treatments. Neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, and gastrointestinal and metabolic toxicities were greater in the experimental arm. As a result, 18% of the patients received < or = two courses of IP therapy. Progression-free survival was superior for patients randomized to the experimental treatment arm (median, 28 v 22 months; relative risk, 0.78; log-rank P =.01, one-tail). There was a borderline improvement in overall survival associated with this regimen (median, 63 v 52 months; relative risk, 0.81; P =.05, one-tail).
                An experimental regimen including moderately high-dose IV carboplatin followed by IP paclitaxel and IV cisplatin yielded a significant improvement in progression-free survival when compared with a standard regimen of IV cisplatin and paclitaxel. Because the improvement in overall survival was of borderline statistical significance and toxicity was greater, the experimental arm is not recommended for routine use. However, the results provide direction for further clinical investigation in small-volume ovarian cancer. 20 patients with F.I.G.O. stages III ovarian cancer were entered into a randomised trial between January 1980 and March 1984. After a surgical resection as complete as possible, 10 of these patients received an intravenous chemotherapy with Adriamycin, Vincaleucoblastin Bleomycin, Fluorouracil and Ifosfamid monthly for 10 months. The other 10 patients received the same combined chemotherapy but by a double route: Intravenously and intraperitoneally. The results were judged at "second look surgery". 1 Of the 10 patients who were treated intravenously, 2 who had had a complete surgical resection had no recurrence. Of the remaining 8 patients who had had an incomplete resection, 4 still had residual lesions that could not be removed completely.
Intraperitoneal chemotherapy increases overall survival and progression-free survival from advanced ovarian cancer. The results of this meta-analysis provide the most reliable estimates of the relative survival benefits of IP over IV therapy and should be used as part of the decision making process. However, the potential for catheter related complications and toxicity needs to be considered when deciding on the most appropriate treatment for each individual woman. The optimal dose, timing and mechanism of administration cannot be addressed from this meta-analysis. This needs to be addressed in the next phase of clinical trials.