The Role of Secondary Cytoreductive Surgery in Recurrent Ovarian Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background Phase 3 randomized clinical trials have been designed to compare secondary cytoreductive surgery followed by systemic therapy with systemic therapy alone for management of patients with recurrent ovarian cancer. This study aimed to compare differences in clinical outcomes between these two treatment approaches. Methods The PRISMA statement was applied. Only phase 3 randomized clinical trials were included in the final analysis. Results Three randomized clinical trials (n = 1250 patients) were identified. Secondary cytoreductive surgery was associated with significantly better progression-free survival (PFS) improvement than systemic therapy alone (hazard ratio [HR], 95% CI, 0.61-0.78;p < 0.001). The PFS benefit was greater for the complete resection subpopulation (HR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.48-0.66;p < 0.001). The HR of overall survival (OS) was similar between the groups (HR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.78-1.10;p = 0.37), but it was 0.73 (95% CI, 0.59-0.91) in favor of the complete resection subpopulation. Conclusion This meta-analysis showed secondary cytoreductive surgery as superior to systemic therapy alone in terms of PFS. The PFS and OS benefits were particularly observed for complete surgical resection. The impact on OS in the general population remains to be proven.

Automated summary

This study compared secondary cytoreductive surgery followed by systemic therapy with systemic therapy alone for recurrent ovarian cancer patients. The results showed that secondary cytoreductive surgery was associated with significantly better progression-free survival (PFS) improvement, especially for the complete resection subpopulation. Overall survival (OS) was similar between the groups, but favored the complete resection subpopulation.