Treatments and overall survival in patients with Krukenberg tumor.


Journal

Archives of gynecology and obstetrics
ISSN: 1432-0711
Titre abrégé: Arch Gynecol Obstet
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 8710213

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
07 2019
Historique:
received: 22 02 2019
accepted: 16 04 2019
pubmed: 3 5 2019
medline: 9 4 2020
entrez: 3 5 2019
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Krukenberg tumor (KT) is a rare secondary ovarian tumor, primarily localized at the gastrointestinal tract in most cases. KT is related to severe prognosis due to its aggressiveness, diagnostic difficulties and poor treatment efficacy. Several treatments have been used, such as cytoreductive surgery (CRS), adjuvant chemotherapy (CT) and/or hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). To date, it is still unclear which treatment or combination of treatments is related to better survival. To assess the most effective therapeutic protocol in terms of overall survival (OS). A systematic review of the literature was performed by searching MEDLINE, Scopus, EMBASE, ClinicalTrial.gov, OVID, Web of Sciences, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar for all studies assessing the association of treatments with OS in KTs. The effectiveness of each treatment protocol was evaluated by comparing the OS between patients treated with different treatment protocols. Twenty retrospective studies, with a total sample size of 1533 KTs, were included in the systematic review. Therapeutic protocols used were CRS in 18 studies, CT in 13 studies, HIPEC in 7 studies, neoadjuvant CT in 2 studies, and some combinations of these in 6 studies. Seven studies showed that CRS significantly improved OS compared to other treatments or association of treatments without it. 11 studies showed that CRS without residual (R0 CRS) had a significantly better OS than CRS with residual (R + CRS). Five studies showed that CT significantly improved OS, but other five showed it did not. Two studies showed that HIPEC in association with CRS improved OS, while another study showed that efficacy of HIPEC was comparable to CT. Two studies evaluated neoadjuvant CT, but results were conflicting. CRS and in particular R0 CRS are the treatments showing the clearest results in improving OS in KT patients. Results about CT are conflicting. HIPEC appears effective both alone and in combination with CRS, and also related to fewer adverse effect than CT. The usefulness of neoadjuvant CT is still unclear. The association of R0 CRS with HIPEC seems to be the most effective and safe therapeutic protocol for KT patients.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Krukenberg tumor (KT) is a rare secondary ovarian tumor, primarily localized at the gastrointestinal tract in most cases. KT is related to severe prognosis due to its aggressiveness, diagnostic difficulties and poor treatment efficacy. Several treatments have been used, such as cytoreductive surgery (CRS), adjuvant chemotherapy (CT) and/or hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). To date, it is still unclear which treatment or combination of treatments is related to better survival.
OBJECTIVE
To assess the most effective therapeutic protocol in terms of overall survival (OS).
METHODS
A systematic review of the literature was performed by searching MEDLINE, Scopus, EMBASE, ClinicalTrial.gov, OVID, Web of Sciences, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar for all studies assessing the association of treatments with OS in KTs. The effectiveness of each treatment protocol was evaluated by comparing the OS between patients treated with different treatment protocols.
RESULTS
Twenty retrospective studies, with a total sample size of 1533 KTs, were included in the systematic review. Therapeutic protocols used were CRS in 18 studies, CT in 13 studies, HIPEC in 7 studies, neoadjuvant CT in 2 studies, and some combinations of these in 6 studies. Seven studies showed that CRS significantly improved OS compared to other treatments or association of treatments without it. 11 studies showed that CRS without residual (R0 CRS) had a significantly better OS than CRS with residual (R + CRS). Five studies showed that CT significantly improved OS, but other five showed it did not. Two studies showed that HIPEC in association with CRS improved OS, while another study showed that efficacy of HIPEC was comparable to CT. Two studies evaluated neoadjuvant CT, but results were conflicting.
CONCLUSION
CRS and in particular R0 CRS are the treatments showing the clearest results in improving OS in KT patients. Results about CT are conflicting. HIPEC appears effective both alone and in combination with CRS, and also related to fewer adverse effect than CT. The usefulness of neoadjuvant CT is still unclear. The association of R0 CRS with HIPEC seems to be the most effective and safe therapeutic protocol for KT patients.

Identifiants

pubmed: 31044302
doi: 10.1007/s00404-019-05167-z
pii: 10.1007/s00404-019-05167-z
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Review

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

15-23

Auteurs

Ruggero Lionetti (R)

General Surgery Unit, Department of Public Health, School of Medicine, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.

Marcello De Luca (M)

General Surgery Unit, Department of Public Health, School of Medicine, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.

Antonio Travaglino (A)

Anatomic Pathology Unit, Department of Advanced Biomedical Sciences, School of Medicine, University of Naples Federico II, Via Sergio Pansini, 5, 80131, Naples, Italy. antonio.travaglino.ap@gmail.com.

Antonio Raffone (A)

Gynecology and Obstetrics Unit, Department of Neurosciences, Reproductive Sciences and Dentistry, School of Medicine, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.

Luigi Insabato (L)

Anatomic Pathology Unit, Department of Advanced Biomedical Sciences, School of Medicine, University of Naples Federico II, Via Sergio Pansini, 5, 80131, Naples, Italy.

Gabriele Saccone (G)

Gynecology and Obstetrics Unit, Department of Neurosciences, Reproductive Sciences and Dentistry, School of Medicine, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.

Massimo Mascolo (M)

Anatomic Pathology Unit, Department of Advanced Biomedical Sciences, School of Medicine, University of Naples Federico II, Via Sergio Pansini, 5, 80131, Naples, Italy.

Maria D'armiento (M)

Pathology Unit, Department of Public Health, School of Medicine, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.

Fulvio Zullo (F)

Gynecology and Obstetrics Unit, Department of Neurosciences, Reproductive Sciences and Dentistry, School of Medicine, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.

Francesco Corcione (F)

General Surgery Unit, Department of Public Health, School of Medicine, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH