Multi-institutional reciprocal validation study of computed tomography predictors of suboptimal primary cytoreduction in patients with advanced ovarian cancer

被引:191
作者
Axtell, Allison E.
Lee, Margaret H.
Bristow, Robert E.
Dowdy, Sean C.
Cliby, William A.
Raman, Steven
Weaver, John P.
Gabbay, Mojan
Ngo, Michael
Lentz, Scott
Cass, Ilana
Li, Andrew J.
Karlan, Beth Y.
Holschneider, Christine H.
机构
[1] Univ Calif Los Angeles, Med Ctr, Los Angeles, CA 90024 USA
[2] Olive View UCLA Med Ctr, Los Angeles, CA USA
[3] Cedars Sinai Med Ctr, Los Angeles, CA 90048 USA
[4] Kaiser Permanente Sunset Med Ctr, Los Angeles, CA USA
[5] Johns Hopkins Med Inst, Baltimore, MD 21205 USA
[6] Mayo Clin, Rochester, MN USA
关键词
D O I
10.1200/JCO.2006.07.7800
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Purpose Identify features on preoperative computed tomography (CT) scans to predict suboptimal primary cytoreduction in patients treated for advanced ovarian cancer in institution A. Reciprocally cross validate the predictors identified with those from two previously published cohorts from institutions B and C. Patients and Methods Preoperative CT scans from patients with stage III/IV epithelial ovarian cancer who underwent primary cytoreduction in institution A between 1999 and 2005 were retrospectively reviewed by radiologists blinded to surgical outcome. Fourteen criteria were assessed. Crossvalidation was performed by applying predictive model A to the patients from cohorts B and C, and reciprocally applying predictive models B and C to cohort A. Results Sixty-five patients from institution A were included. The rate of optimal cytoreduction (<= 1 cm residual disease) was 78%. Diaphragm disease and large bowel mesentery implants were the only CT predictors of suboptimal cytoreduction on univariate (P < .02) and multivariate analysis (P < .02). In combination (model A), these predictors had a sensitivity of 79%, a specificity of 75%, and an accuracy of 77% for suboptimal cytoreduction. When model A was applied to cohorts B and C, accuracy rates dropped to 34% and 64%, respectively. Reciprocally, models B and C had accuracy rates of 93% and 79% in their original cohorts, which fell to 74% and 48% in cohort A. Conclusion The high accuracy rates of CT predictors of suboptimal cytoreduction in the original cohorts could not be confirmed in the cross validation. Preoperative CT predictors should be used with caution when deciding between surgical cytoreduction and neoadjuvant chemotherapy.
引用
收藏
页码:384 / 389
页数:6
相关论文
共 34 条
[1]   Intraperitoneal cisplatin plus intravenous cyclophosphamide versus intravenous cisplatin plus intravenous cyclophosphamide for stage III ovarian cancer [J].
Alberts, DS ;
Liu, PY ;
Hannigan, EV ;
OToole, R ;
Williams, SD ;
Young, JA ;
Franklin, EW ;
ClarkePearson, DL ;
Malviya, VK ;
DuBeshter, B ;
Adelson, MD ;
Hoskins, WJ .
NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 1996, 335 (26) :1950-1955
[2]   Ovarian cancer surgical resectability: Relative impact of disease, patient status, and surgeon [J].
Aletti, GD ;
Gostout, BS ;
Podratz, KC ;
Cliby, WA .
GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY, 2006, 100 (01) :33-37
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2005, Cancer facts and figures
[4]  
Ansquer Y, 2001, CANCER, V91, P2329, DOI 10.1002/1097-0142(20010615)91:12<2329::AID-CNCR1265>3.0.CO
[5]  
2-U
[6]   Intraperitoneal cisplatin and paclitaxel in ovarian cancer [J].
Armstrong, DK ;
Bundy, B ;
Wenzel, L ;
Huang, HQ ;
Baergen, R ;
Lele, S ;
Copeland, LJ ;
Walker, JL ;
Burger, RA .
NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2006, 354 (01) :34-43
[7]  
Bristow RE, 2000, CANCER, V89, P1532, DOI 10.1002/1097-0142(20001001)89:7<1532::AID-CNCR17>3.0.CO
[8]  
2-A
[9]   Survival effect of maximal cytoreductive surgery for advanced ovarian carcinoma during the platinum era: A meta-analysis [J].
Bristow, RE ;
Tomacruz, RS ;
Armstrong, DK ;
Trimble, EL ;
Montz, FJ .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2002, 20 (05) :1248-1259
[10]   Platinum-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy and interval surgical cytoreduction for advanced ovarian cancer: A meta-analysis [J].
Bristow, Robert E. ;
Chi, Dennis S. .
GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY, 2006, 103 (03) :1070-1076