Clinical outcomes of post-operative intraperitoneal chemotherapy for patients with early stage high grade serous ovarian cancer treated at British Columbia Cancer Agency
Bibliographic record
Abstract
IntroductionIntraperitoneal (IP) chemotherapy is recommended for optimally debulked stage III ovarian cancer, and its benefit for prolonging overall and progression-free survival for advanced ovarian cancer was previously shown in randomized trials. In British Columbia, we extrapolated from this and have been using IP chemotherapy for stage I/II HGSC patients for the last 10 years. We conducted a retrospective study to review the clinical outcomes of using IP/IV chemotherapy compared to IV chemotherapy for optimally debulked stage 1 HGSC cases. MethodologyA retrospective chart review was performed on women with early-stage HGSC, who were optimally debulked at their primary surgery between 2007-2015 and received either IV or IP/IV chemotherapy postoperatively. We analyzed and compared the survival outcomes for women with stage 1A-1C HGSC. Kaplan-Meier method was used to correlate the chemotherapy delivery method with progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), using the statistical program R. ResultsWe identified 99 patients; 80 (81%) received IV chemotherapy and 19 (19%) received IP/IV chemotherapy. All patients had high-grade serous tumors. Among IP/IV cohort, 2/19 (11%) dropped the IP therapy in the middle of their treatment due to abdominal pain at an IP port site or hypersensitivity reaction to IV paclitaxel. 5-year PFS was 88.4% (74.5-100%) and 69.7% (58.7-82.7%) among the IP/IV and IV cohorts, respectively (p=0.549). There was a trend for higher 5-year OS for the IP/IV group; however, this did not reach statistical significance (100% vs. 71.4%; p=0.182). ConclusionIn our study, IP/IV chemotherapy for optimally debulked stage 1 HGSC patients was associated with a trend for higher 5-year PFS and OS compared to IV chemotherapy, however, this was not statistically significant. Larger prospective study is warranted.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".