Advertisement

International Journal of Clinical Oncology

, Volume 19, Issue 1, pp 121–126 | Cite as

Extremely poor postrecurrence oncological outcome for patients with recurrent mucinous ovarian cancer

  • Hiroaki KajiyamaEmail author
  • Mika Mizuno
  • Kiyosumi Shibata
  • Michiyasu Kawai
  • Tetsuro Nagasaka
  • Fumitaka Kikkawa
Original Article

Abstract

Background

This study was conducted to assess the long-term clinical outcome for patients with recurrent mucinous epithelial ovarian cancer (RmOC) in comparison with recurrent serous epithelial ovarian cancer (RsOC).

Methods

Three hundred and eighty-four patients with recurrent ovarian cancer, including 340 RsOC and 44 RmOC patients, were analyzed in this study. The pathological slides were evaluated under central pathological review. The prognostic significance of clinicopathological factors was evaluated employing both uni- and multivariable analysis.

Results

The 3- and 5-year postrecurrence survival (PRS) rates of patients with RmOC were 17.3, and 6.9 %, respectively. In contrast, those of patients with RsOC were 29.8 and 18.8 %, respectively. The PRS of patients with RmOC was significantly poorer than that of patients with RsOC (PRS: P = 0.0006). Moreover, either in the presence or absence of a residual tumor (RT) at initial surgery, the PRS of patients with RmOC was markedly poorer than that of patients with RsOC [RT (−): P < 0.0001: RT (+): P = 0.0912]. In multivariable analysis, a mucinous histology predicted a significantly poorer PRS (RmOC vs. RsOC: hazard ratio (HR) 2.080, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.434–3.016, P = 0.0001). Confining analysis to deceased patients (N = 302), the proportion of RmOC patients who died within 12 months following recurrence was markedly higher than that of RsOC [RmOC 69.2 %, RsOC: 41.1 % (P < 0.0001)].

Conclusions

The clinical outcome after recurrence in patients with RmOC was extremely poor. This confirms that RmOC should be considered a different entity from other epithelial ovarian cancers.

Keywords

Recurrent ovarian cancer Mucinous epithelial ovarian cancer (mEOC) Serous epithelial ovarian cancer (sEOC) Postrecurrence survival Residual tumor 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We sincerely thank Drs. Y. Kinoshita (Ogaki Municipal Hospital), K. Sakakibara (Okazaki Municipal Hospital), A. Takeda (Gifu Prefectural Tajimi Hospital), H. Oguchi (Toyota Memorial Hospital), O. Yamamuro (Japanese Red Cross Nagoya Second Hospital), K. Mizuno (Japanese Red Cross Nagoya First Hospital), and K. Matsuzawa (Anjyo Kosei Hospital) who collaborated in data collection.

Conflict of interest

All authors declare that they have no competing interests.

References

  1. 1.
    Jemal A, Bray F, Center MM et al (2011) Global cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin 61(2):69–90PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Schiavone MB, Herzog TJ, Lewin SN et al (2011) Natural history and outcome of mucinous carcinoma of the ovary. Am J Obstet Gynecol 205(5):480 e1–e8Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Vergote I, De Brabanter J, Fyles A et al (2001) Prognostic importance of degree of differentiation and cyst rupture in stage I invasive epithelial ovarian carcinoma. Lancet 357(9251):176–182PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chan JK, Teoh D, Hu JM et al (2008) Do clear cell ovarian carcinomas have poorer prognosis compared to other epithelial cell types? A study of 1411 clear cell ovarian cancers. Gynecol Oncol 109(3):370–376PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kajiyama H, Shibata K, Mizuno M et al (2011) Fertility-sparing surgery in young women with mucinous adenocarcinoma of the ovary. Gynecol Oncol 122(2):334–338PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Pectasides D, Fountzilas G, Aravantinos G et al (2005) Advanced stage mucinous epithelial ovarian cancer: the Hellenic Cooperative Oncology Group experience. Gynecol Oncol 97(2):436–441PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hess V, A’Hern R, Nasiri N et al (2004) Mucinous epithelial ovarian cancer: a separate entity requiring specific treatment. J Clin Oncol 22(6):1040–1044PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Shimada M, Kigawa J, Ohishi Y et al (2009) Clinicopathological characteristics of mucinous adenocarcinoma of the ovary. Gynecol Oncol 113(3):331–334PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Suzuki S, Kajiyama H, Shibata K et al (2008) Is there any association between retroperitoneal lymphadenectomy and survival benefit in ovarian clear cell carcinoma patients? Ann Oncol 19(7):1284–1287PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lee KR, Young RH (2003) The distinction between primary and metastatic mucinous carcinomas of the ovary: gross and histologic findings in 50 cases. Am J Surg Pathol 27(3):281–292PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Harrison ML, Jameson C, Gore ME et al (2008) Mucinous ovarian cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer 18(2):209–214PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Japan Society of Clinical Oncology 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hiroaki Kajiyama
    • 1
    Email author
  • Mika Mizuno
    • 1
  • Kiyosumi Shibata
    • 1
  • Michiyasu Kawai
    • 2
  • Tetsuro Nagasaka
    • 3
  • Fumitaka Kikkawa
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Obstetrics and GynecologyNagoya University Graduate School of MedicineNagoyaJapan
  2. 2.Department of Obstetrics and GynecologyToyohashi Municipal HospitalToyohashiJapan
  3. 3.Department of Medical TechnologyNagoya University School of Health ScienceNagoyaJapan

Personalised recommendations