Fulltext

Systemic therapy developments and their effects regarding the current concept of recurrent ovarian carcinoma as a chronic disease

Güth, Uwe ; Kann, Simone ; Huang, Dorothy ; Schötzau, Andreas ; Holzgreve, Wolfgang ; Wight, Edward

In: Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics, 2009, vol. 280, no. 5, p. 719-724

Ajouter à la liste personnelle
    Titre
    • Systemic therapy developments and their effects regarding the current concept of recurrent ovarian carcinoma as a chronic disease
    Auteur
    • Güth, Uwe. Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Basel (UHB), Spitalstrasse 21, 4031, Basel, Switzerland
    • Kann, Simone. Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Basel (UHB), Spitalstrasse 21, 4031, Basel, Switzerland
    • Huang, Dorothy. Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Basel (UHB), Spitalstrasse 21, 4031, Basel, Switzerland
    • Schötzau, Andreas. Schötzau and Simmen Institute for Biomathematics, Malzgasse 9, 4052, Basel, Switzerland
    • Holzgreve, Wolfgang. Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Basel (UHB), Spitalstrasse 21, 4031, Basel, Switzerland
    • Wight, Edward. Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Basel (UHB), Spitalstrasse 21, 4031, Basel, Switzerland
    Type de document
    • Postprint
    Langue
    • Anglais
    Publié dans
    • Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics, 2009, vol. 280, no. 5, p. 719-724. Springer-Verlag
    Autre version électronique
    Identifiant OAI-PMH
    • oai:doc.rero.ch:320305
    Summary
    Purpose: To demonstrate how the current concept of recurrent ovarian carcinoma (ROC) as a chronic disease resulted in developments in the systemic treatment strategies and outcome over time. Methods: We compared therapy type and course of a population-based cohort whose recurrent disease was diagnosed from 1990 to 2006. We divided the patients into two subgroups depending on the year of diagnosis of ROC (group A 1990-1997, n=70; group B 1998-2006, n=63). Results: Both study groups showed similar results in survival (median recurrent disease-specific survival—A 18 months vs. B 19 months; P=0.549). In group B, the patients had significantly fewer combination therapies administered [12.0% vs. 24.1%; odds ratio (OR) 0.43; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.23-0.81; P=0.0057], received more therapy lines (≥3 lines 56.1% vs. 31.1%; OR 3.10; 95% CI 1.37-7.17; P=0.005) and had significantly longer times of treatment (TT) in relation to the survival time (ST; mean TT/ST-ratio 57.5% vs. 47.5%; difference of the mean values B-A=−10.02; 95%CI −17.99 to −2.05; P=0.014). Conclusions: The finding that survival of ROC patients could not be improved over time should not necessarily be viewed with undue pessimism regarding the general therapy situation. In the more recent study period, a similar outcome could be achieved with less aggressive treatment regimens, i.e., with fewer combination therapies and with longer treatment periods using less toxic agents. When a disease which requires periodic chemotherapy to control progressive course is increasingly treated with a strategy that permits stabilization with limited cumulative toxicity, then the requirements of a chronic disease management have been fulfilled