4.3 Article

Safety and efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy with bevacizumab in advanced-stage peritoneal/ ovarian cancer patients

Journal

TAIWANESE JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Volume 57, Issue 5, Pages 650-653

Publisher

ELSEVIER TAIWAN
DOI: 10.1016/j.tjog.2018.08.006

Keywords

Ovarian cancer; Neoadjuvant chemotherapy; Interval debulking surgery; Bevacizumab

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) with bevacizumab (Bev) at our institute. Materials and methods: Eleven patients with stage IIIC or IV peritoneal/ovarian cancer who underwent interval debulking surgery (IDS) after NAC with Bev between December 2014 and December 2016 were enrolled retrospectively (TCB group). As a control group, we enrolled 13 patients evaluated between December 2012 and December 2014 who underwent IDS and received NAC without Bev (TC group). Both the TCB and TC groups received combination chemotherapy consisting of paclitaxel (175 mg/m(2)) or docetaxel (70 mg/m(2)) and carboplatin (area under the curve 6 mg/mL/min) administered intravenously every 3 weeks (cycles 3-6). Results: All patients in both groups underwent IDS. There were 7 (63.6%) and 8 (61.5%) cases with stage IIIC disease and 4 (36.3%) and 5 (30.7%) with stage IV disease in the TCB and TC groups, respectively. The complete resection rate was 81.8% in the TCB group and 69.2% in the TC group. The rate of achieving either complete or optimal resection was 100% in the TCB group and 69.2% in the TC group (p = 0.043). Hematoxicity (grade 3 or higher) was observed in 9 patients (81.8%) in the TCB group and 12 (92.3%) patients in the TC group. One patient (9%) in the TCB group experienced abdominal incisional hernia due to a fascial defect. Conclusion: IDS after NAC with Bev is safe, with a similar efficacy as that after NAC without Bev. (C) 2018 Taiwan Association of Obstetrics & Gynecology. Publishing services by Elsevier B.V.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available