Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Evaluation of Computed Tomography Scan and CA 125 Response in Predicting Operability in Advanced Ovarian Cancer and Assessing Survival Outcome in Interval Cytoreductive Surgery

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Indian Journal of Surgical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The study aims at the prediction of optimal cytoreduction (OCR) in patients undergoing interval cytoreduction (ICR) in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (AEOC) based on CT imaging and CA 125 values and assessing the survival pattern of these patients after ICR. This is a prospective observational study of patients with stage III C ovarian cancer who underwent ICR in our institution after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT). All consecutive patients operated from April 2016 to October 2017 were included in the study. From their medical records, their demographic details and clinical variables were recorded. The CA 125 value and CT scan findings before and after chemotherapy were documented. A Bristow’s predictive score (BS) was calculated based on the radiological parameters. After ICR, the outcome of the surgery was documented. Optimal cytoreduction (OCR) was defined as no gross residual disease after surgery. The surgical outcome was correlated with the CA 125 difference pre and post chemotherapy and Bristow’s predictive score pre and post chemotherapy. The patients were followed up and their survival at 6 and 12 months was assessed. Univariate and multivariate analysis was done to identify factors predicting OCR. 51 patients were included in the study. Age group of the women ranged from 31 to 74 years with a mean of 52 years. Majority of the patients (70.6%) were postmenopausal. Of the 51 women, OCR could be achieved in 31 patients (60.8%). Post-chemotherapy, 36 patients had elevated CA125 above baseline of which 50% attained OCR. Forty six patients had CA 125 response post chemotherapy of which 67.4% attained OCR. Forty five patients had reduction in Bristow Score compared to the pre chemo values of which 64.4% attained OCR which was not found to be statistically significant. Overall survival was 100% survival at 6 months and 92.8% at 12 months in those who achieved OCR. Those with residual disease 0.1–1 cm had survival of 74.1% at 6 and 12 months. Those with residual disease > 1 cm had a survival of 50% at 6 and 12 months. CA125 response has a significant role in predicting OCR while CT evaluation using the BS was not useful in predicting OCR during ICR for AEOC.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Aletti GD, Gostout BS, Podratz KC et al (2006) Ovarian cancer surgical resectability: relative impact of disease, patient status, and surgeon. GynecolOncol 100:33–37

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bristow RE, Duska LR, Lambrou NC, Fishman EK, O'Neill MJ, Trimble EL et al (2000) A model for predicting surgical outcome in patients with advanced ovarian carcinoma using computed tomography. Cancer 89:1532–1540

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Vergote I, Tropé CG, Amant F, Kristensen GB, Ehlen T, Johnson N, European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer-Gynaecological Cancer Group; NCIC Clinical Trials Group et al (2010) Neoadjuvant chemotherapy or primary surgery in stage IIIC or IV ovarian cancer. N Engl J Med 363(10):943–953

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Kehoe S, Hook J, Nankivell M, Jayson GC, Kitchener H, Lopes T et al (2015) Primarychemotherapy versus primary surgery for newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer (CHORUS): an open label, randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial. Lancet Oncol 386(9990):249–257

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Stuart GCE, Kitchener H, Bacon M, duBois A, Friedlander M, Ledermann J et al (2011) Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup (GCIG) consensus statement on clinical trials in ovarian cancer report from the Fourth Ovarian Cancer Consensus Conference. Int J Gynecol Cancer 21:750Y755

    Google Scholar 

  6. Chi DS, Venkatraman ES, Masson V, Hoskins WJ (2000) The ability of preoperative serum CA-125 to predict optimal primary tumor cytoreduction in stage III epithelial ovarian carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol 77:227–231

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Arits AH, Stoot JE, Botterweck AA, Roumen FJ, Voogd AC (2008) Preoperative serum CA125 levels do not predict suboptimal cytoreductive surgery in epithelial ovarian cancer.15. Int J Gynecol Cancer 18(4):621–628

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Obeidat B, Latimer J, Crawford R (2004) Can optimal primary cytoreduction be predicted in advanced stage epithelial ovarian cancer? Role of preoperative serum CA-125 level. Gynecol Obstet Investig 57(3):153–156

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Coakley FV (2002) Staging ovarian cancer: role of imaging. Radiol Clin N Am 40:609–636

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Coakley FV, Choi PH, Gougoutas CA, Pothuri B, Venkatraman E, Chi D, Bergman A, Hricak H (2002) Peritoneal metastases: detection with spiral CT in patients with ovarian cancer. Radiology 223:495–499

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Coakley FV, Westphalen AC, Hricak H, Okuno WT, Powell B (2005) Role of CT and MR imaging in predicting optimal cytoreduction of newly diagnosed primary epithelial ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol 96(2):301–306

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Nelson BE, Rosenfield AT, Schwartz PE (1993) Preoperative abdominopelvic computed tomographic prediction of optimal cytoreduction in epithelial ovarian carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 11:166–172

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Forstner R, Hricak H, Occhipinti KA, Powell CB, Frankel SD, Stern JL (1995) Ovarian cancer: staging with CT and MR imaging. Radiology 197:619–626

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Meyer JI, Kennedy AW, Friedman R, Ayoub A, Zepp RC (1995) Ovarian carcinoma: value of CT in predicting success of debulking surgery. Am J Roentgenol 165:875–878

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Bristow RE, Tomacruz RS, Armstrong DK, Trimble EL, Montz FJ (2002) Survival effect of maximal cytoreductive surgery for advanced ovarian carcinoma during the platinum era: a meta-analysis. J Clin Oncol 20(5):1248–1259

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Chang SJ, Bristow RE (2012) RyuHS. Impact of complete cytoreduction leaving no gross residual disease associated with radical cytoreductive surgical procedures on survival in advanced ovarian cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 19(13):4059–4067. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-012-2446-8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Baldwin LA, Huang B, Miller RW, Tucker T, Goodrich ST, Podzielinski I et al (2012) Tenyear relative survival for epithelial ovarian cancer. Obstet Gynecol 120(3):612–618

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my supervisors Dr. P Rema, Dr. Anil Prahladan and Dr. Suchetha Jyothish for providing their invaluable guidance, comments and suggestions throughout the conduct of this study. I would specially thank Dr. Preethi George for her assistance in the data analysis. Also, I would like to thank Dr. Aswathy and Dr. Vijayshanti for their help during the preparation of the sample and data collection.

Disclaimers

This work described has not been published before and it is not under consideration for publication anywhere. Its publication has been approved by all its authors.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgical Oncology, Regional Cancer Centre, Thiruvanathapuram, Kerala, India

    P. Rema, Suchetha Samabasivan, J. Siva Ranjith & Shaji Thomas

  2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Azeezia Medical College Hospital, Meeyannoor, Kollam 37, Kerala, India

    Elizabeth Reshmi John

  3. Department of Radiodiagnosis, Regional Cancer Centre, Thiruvanathapuram, Kerala, India

    Anil Prahladan

  4. Department of Biostatistics, Regional Cancer Centre, Thiruvanathapuram, Kerala, India

    Preethi George

  5. Thiruvananthapuram, India

    Elizabeth Reshmi John

Authors
  1. P. Rema
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Elizabeth Reshmi John
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Suchetha Samabasivan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Anil Prahladan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Preethi George
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. J. Siva Ranjith
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Shaji Thomas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Conceptualization: Elizabeth Reshmi John,P Rema.

Methodology: P Rema, Elizabeth Reshmi John, Anil Prahladan, Preethi George.

Software: Preethi George.

Validation: Preethi George.

Formal Analysis: Elizabeth Reshmi John.

Investigation: P Rema, Elizabeth Reshmi John.

Resources: P Rema, SuchethaSambasivan, Sivaranjith J, Anil Prahladan, Preethi George.

Data Curation: Elizabeth Reshmi John, Aswathy G Nath, Vijayshanthi J.

Writing—original draft: Elizabeth Reshmi John, P Rema.

Writing—review and editing: P Rema, SuchethaSambasivan, Sivaranjith J.

Visualisation: P Rema, SuchethaSambasivan, Sivaranjith J.

Supervision: P Rema, SuchethaSambasivan, Sivaranjith J, AnilPrahladan, Preethi George.

Project Administration: P Rema.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Elizabeth Reshmi John.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rema, P., John, E.R., Samabasivan, S. et al. Evaluation of Computed Tomography Scan and CA 125 Response in Predicting Operability in Advanced Ovarian Cancer and Assessing Survival Outcome in Interval Cytoreductive Surgery. Indian J Surg Oncol 10, 426–434 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13193-018-0868-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13193-018-0868-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation