Skip Navigation


Japanese Journal of Clinical Oncology Advance Access originally published online on May 27, 2008
Japanese Journal of Clinical Oncology 2008 38(6):445-450; doi:10.1093/jjco/hyn034
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrowOA All Versions of this Article:
38/6/445    most recent
hyn034v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kim, H. S.
Right arrow Articles by Kang, S.-B.
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Kim, H. S.
Right arrow Articles by Kang, S.-B.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?


© 2008 The Author(s)
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/uk/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited

Are Three Additional Cycles of Chemotherapy Useful in Patients with Advanced-stage Epithelial Ovarian Cancer After a Complete Response to Six Cycles of Intravenous Adjuvant Paclitaxel and Carboplatin?{dagger}

Hee Seung Kim, Noh-Hyun Park, Hyun Hoon Chung, Jae Weon Kim, Yong-Sang Song and Soon-Beom Kang

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Cancer Research Institute, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea

For reprints and all correspondence: Noh-Hyun Park, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Cancer Research Institute, Seoul National University, 28 Yungun-Dong, Chongno-Gu, Seoul 110-744, Republic of Korea. E-mail: pnhkhr{at}snu.ac.kr

Received December 17, 2007; accepted April 7, 2008


   Abstract
TOP
 Abstract
INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 Funding
 References
 
Background: To evaluate the efficacy of three additional cycles of chemotherapy in patients with the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics Stage III or IV, who achieved a complete response after six cycles of intravenous adjuvant paclitaxel/carboplatin after surgery.

Methods: The clinical data of 94 patients with complete response after six cycles of adjuvant paclitaxel/carboplatin after surgery between January 1997 and March 2007 were reviewed retrospectively. Three additional cycles using the same chemotherapy were administered to 57 patients as consolidation chemotherapy (Group 1). Thirty-seven patients without the additional cycles served as controls (Group 2). Disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were evaluated using the Kaplan–Meier method with the log-rank test. The importance of consolidation chemotherapy as a prognostic factor affecting survival was examined using the Cox's proportional hazard analysis. The incidence of chemotherapy-induced hematological toxicities was compared between the two groups using chi-square test.

Results: Median DFS and mean OS were not significantly different between the two groups (15 versus 22 months, P = 0.703; 69 versus 73 months, P = 0.891, respectively). Consolidation chemotherapy was not a prognostic factor of survival although optimal debulking surgery and lower value of serum CA-125 levels after six cycles of the chemotherapy were prognostic factors improving DFS (P < 0.01). Grade 3 or 4 leukopenia was more common in patients treated with consolidation chemotherapy than in those not treated (50.9 versus 21.6%, P = 0.004).

Conclusion: Consolidation chemotherapy using paclitaxel/carboplatin may be inefficient and relatively toxic to advanced-stage epithelial ovarian cancer patients with complete response to six cycles of the same chemotherapy after surgery.

Key Words: consolidation chemotherapy • paclitaxel • carboplatin • ovarian cancer


   INTRODUCTION
TOP
 Abstract
 INTRODUCTION
MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 Funding
 References
 
Ovarian cancer is the second most common gynecologic malignancy with 20 180 new cases and 15 310 deaths each year in women in the USA (1). The standard treatment for ovarian cancer consists of staging laparotomy, including maximal cytoreductive surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy using taxanes and platinum compounds.As a result of prospective trials by the Gynecologic Oncology Group (GOG) and European–Canadian investigators, paclitaxel and cisplatin became a more effective regimen in 1998 (2). However, carboplatin has been the preferred agent to cisplatin because gastrointestinal and neurological toxicities of carboplatin were appreciably lower than those of cisplatin in some studies, including the GOG protocol 158 (3).

The number of cycles of intravenous adjuvant paclitaxel and carboplatin seems to be different according to the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) criteria for ovarian cancer (4). Treatment with these drugs every 3 weeks for 3–6 cycles is recommended in patients with high-grade, high-risk stage I epithelial ovarian cancer. For those with advanced-stage epithelial ovarian cancer, intravenous adjuvant paclitaxel and carboplatin every 3 weeks for 6–8 cycles is recommended (5).

Although ~50% of patients with advanced-stage epithelial ovarian cancer achieve a first pathologic complete remission with the first treatment course, 90% of suboptimally debulked patients and 70% of optimally debulked patients relapse in 18–24 months. Improvement of survival should be approached by making primary adjuvant chemotherapy more effective or by applying consolidation therapy to patients with complete response after primary standard treatment (6).

Nevertheless, the role of consolidation chemotherapy is controversial in advanced-stage epithelial ovarian cancer patients with complete response after primary standard treatment. Some studies have shown that consolidation chemotherapy improves survival in patients with complete response to paclitaxel- and platinum-based chemotherapy (7,8). On the other hand, consolidation chemotherapy has been reported to be ineffective for patients with complete response and increases the incidence of chemotherapy-induced toxicities, including peripheral neuropathy (9,10). Furthermore, the role of consolidation chemotherapy has not yet been completely clarified because previous studies were performed with various methods of consolidation chemotherapy including different routes of administration (intravenous or intraperitoneal), different regimens of chemotherapy and concurrent radiation therapy.

Therefore, this study was designed to evaluate the efficacy of three additional cycles of intravenous chemotherapy using paclitaxel/carboplatin as consolidation chemotherapy in patients with advanced-stage epithelial ovarian cancer who achieved complete response after six cycles of the same chemotherapy.


   MATERIALS AND METHODS
TOP
 Abstract
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 Funding
 References
 
Patients
All data of patients for this study were derived from a database of 477 patients who were diagnosed with epithelial ovarian cancer after staging laparotomy between January 1997 and March 2007. The inclusion criteria were as follows: patients with a histological confirmation of epithelial ovarian cancer; those who underwent staging laparotomy including maximal cytoreductive surgery; those treated with adjuvant paclitaxel and carboplatin chemotherapy for six or nine cycles; those with complete response after six cycles of paclitaxel and carboplatin chemotherapy; Eastern Co-operative Oncology Group performance states of 0 to 2; and those without any underlying diseases that may have affected survival. The current study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Seoul National University Hospital. The requirement for informed consent was waived because of the retrospective nature of this study.

Patients were required to have adequate bone marrow, hepatic and renal function, defined as white blood cells ≥ 3000/mm3, absolute neutrophil counts ≥ 1500/mm3, platelet counts ≥ 75 000/mm3, hemoglobin levels ≥ 8.0 g/dl, serum bilirubin levels ≤ 1.8 mg/dl, serum transaminase levels ≤ 100 IU/l and serum creatinine levels ≤ 1.5 mg/dl.

Optimal and suboptimal debulking surgeries were defined as a residual tumor ≤ 1 cm and >1 cm in maximal diameter, respectively. All patients were classified according to the FIGO criteria for ovarian cancer (4), and histological diagnosis was performed according to the World Health Organization (WHO) classification.

All patients were then divided into two groups. Patients were similarly informed of their eligibility to receive three additional cycles of consolidation chemotherapy; patient consent to treatment was included in the medical records. Patients who then received three additional cycles after six cycles of primary adjuvant chemotherapy were included in Group 1, whereas patients treated with only six cycles of adjuvant chemotherapy were included in Group 2.

Chemotherapy
All patients received intravenous adjuvant paclitaxel and carboplatin chemotherapy that started 2–3 weeks after surgery. The chemotherapeutic regimens consisted of paclitaxel (135 mg/m2 for a 24-h infusion period or 175 mg/m2 for a 3-h infusion period) and carboplatin (AUC 4.5 or 5). Chemotherapy was repeated every 3 weeks.

Evaluation of Response, Definition of Survival and Toxicity Criteria
Responses after six cycles of primary adjuvant chemotherapy were evaluated using appropriate imaging studies, such as computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and positron emission tomography (PET), and serum CA-125 levels. Serum CA-125 levels were measured within 1 week before staging laparotomy and each cycle of primary adjuvant chemotherapy. They were measured using a radioimmunoassay kit (Fujirebio Diagnostics, Malvern, PA, USA) (11). The upper normal value of serum CA-125 was 37 U/ml. Since second-look laparotomy has been reported to be not associated with improvement in clinical outcomes (3), response to the chemotherapy was defined in relation to the difference between baseline and 4 weeks after the completion of chemotherapy according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) and serum CA-125 levels (12,13). Therefore, a complete response was defined as the disappearance of all measurable diseases for at least 4 weeks and the normalization of serum CA-125 levels after five cycles of the chemotherapy.

Disease-free survival (DFS) was defined as the time that elapsed from the date after the completion of primary adjuvant chemotherapy to the date of clinically proven recurrence. Overall survival (OS) was calculated as the time from the date of staging laparotomy to the date of cancer-related death or the end of study. Hematological toxicities due to chemotherapy were coded according to the National Cancer Common Toxicity Criteria (NCI-CTC), version 2.0 (14).

Statistical Analysis
Clinical prognostic factors affecting DFS and OS were identified by the use of Cox's proportional hazard analysis. DFS and OS between the two groups were evaluated using the Kaplan–Meier method with the log-rank test. Clinical characteristics and hematological toxicities were analysed using the Student's t-test and chi-square test. Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS software (Version 12.0; SPSS Inc, Chicago, IL, USA). A value of P< 0.05 was considered statistically significant.


   RESULTS
TOP
 Abstract
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
DISCUSSION
 Funding
 References
 
Patients Characteristics
A total of 94 patients with a median age of 52 years (range, 24–79 years) were enrolled in the current study. Among all patients, 57 were included in Group 1 and 37 in Group 2. Clinicopathologic characteristics of the two groups are summarized in Table 1. Sixty-two (66.0%) patients were in menopause. According to the FIGO criteria for ovarian cancer, two (2.1%) patients were in Stage IIIa, 11 (11.7%) in Stage IIIb, 73 (77.7%) in Stage IIIc and 8 (8.5%) in Stage IV. Tumor grade was G1 in 9 (9.6%), G2 in 17 (18.1%) and G3 in 68 (72.3%) of all patients. Histologically, 77 (81.9%) tumors were diagnosed as serous carcinoma, nine (9.6%) as endometrioid carcinoma, five (5.3%) as clear cell carcinoma, one (1.1%) as undifferentiated carcinoma and two (2.1%) as mixed serous and undifferentiated carcinoma.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 1. Clinicopathologic characteristics of Groups 1 (nine cycles) and 2 (six cycles)

 
The median value of serum CA-125 levels before surgery and after six cycles of primary adjuvant chemotherapy were 765 U/ml (range, 21–300 000 U/ml) and 8 U/ml (range, 5–37 U/ml), respectively. Pelvic or para-aortic lymph node sampling or dissection was performed on 54 (57.4%) of all patients, and lymph node metastasis was identified in 31 (57.4%). Among all patients, 48 (51.1%) and 46 (48.9%) patients were classified into optimal and suboptimal groups, respectively. CT was performed in 63 (67.0%) patients, MRI in 7 (7.5%) and PET scan in 24 (25.5%) for the diagnosis of complete response. When clinical characteristics between the two groups were compared using the Student's t-test and chi-square test, there was a significant difference only in age (P = 0.012) (Table 1).

Evaluation of Survival and Toxicity
The median DFS and OS of all patients was 22 months (range, 1–96 months) and 74 months (range, 6–100 months), respectively. The median DFS in Groups 1 and 2 was 15 and 22 months, respectively (P = 0.703) (Fig. 1). We calculated mean OS in the two groups because Group 2 did not reach median OS. The mean OS in Groups 1 and 2 was 69 and 73 months, respectively (P = 0.891) (Fig. 2). On multivariate Cox's proportional hazard analysis, consolidation chemotherapy was not a prognostic factor for DFS although optimal debulking surgery and lower value of serum CA-125 levels after six cycles of primary adjuvant chemotherapy were independent prognostic factors improving DFS (P < 0.05) (Table 2). However, there was no independent prognostic factor for OS (P > 0.05).


Figure 1
View larger version (12K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PowerPoint slide]
  		Figure 1. Kaplan–Meier analysis with the log-rank test of disease-free survival (DFS) between groups 1 (9 cycles) and 2 (6 cycles) (median DFS: 15 versus 22 months, P = 0.703).

 

Figure 2
View larger version (11K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PowerPoint slide]
  		Figure 2. Kaplan–Meier analysis with the log-rank test of overall survival (OS) between groups 1 (9 cycles) and 2 (6 cycles) (mean OS: 69 versus 73 months, P = 0.891).

 

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 2. Multivariate Cox's proportional hazard analysis for clinical prognostic factors affecting disease-free survival (DFS) of patients with complete response after six cycles of primary adjuvant paclitaxel and carboplatin following staging laparotomy in advanced-stage epithelial ovarian cancer

 
When chemotherapy-induced hematological toxicities were compared between the two groups, Grade 3 or 4 leukopenia was more common in patients who were treated with consolidation chemotherapy than in those who were not (50.9 versus 21.6%, P = 0.004) (Table 3).


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 3. Chemotherapy-induced hematological toxicities between Groups 1 (nine cycles) and 2 (six cycles)

 

   DISCUSSION
TOP
 Abstract
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
Funding
 References
 
The aim of the current study was to evaluate the efficacy of three additional cycles as consolidation therapy for advanced-stage epithelial ovarian cancer patients with complete response after six cycles of adjuvant paclitaxel and carboplatin chemotherapy after staging laparotomy. Consolidation chemotherapy using paclitaxel/carboplatin may be inefficient and relatively toxic to advanced-stage epithelial ovarian cancer patients with complete response to six cycles of the same chemotherapy after surgery. The current study included some limitations as follows: first, the recommendation of additional chemotherapy in complete responders' after six cycles of adjuvant paclitaxel/carboplatin chemotherapy was different depending upon the physician because the role of consolidation chemotherapy has been controversial in previous studies. Thus, patients were classified into two groups based upon patient consent to additional consolidation chemotherapy; all patients were similarly informed of their eligibility for additional chemotherapy but classification was based upon the individual patient's decision. Secondly, the number of serous-type epithelial ovarian cancer is relatively higher than that suggested in a previous report (52.4%) although serous type is known to be the most frequent in epithelial ovarian cancer (15). Thirdly, different imaging studies (CT, MRI or PET) were used for the evaluation of complete response. However, there was no significant difference in the distribution of selected types of imaging studies, and survival was not affected by the type of imaging studies between the two groups (P > 0.05), which minimized the bias in the current study.

The reason why consolidation chemotherapy has been important for the management of epithelial ovarian cancer is that most clinicians expect that extending treatment beyond the standard six cycles of chemotherapy can improve survival in epithelial ovarian cancer. Thus, various methods have been developed, which consist of different regimens using paclitaxel or platinum agents (8,16,17), second-line chemotherapy (18,19), intraperitoneal chemotherapy (20,21), high-dose chemotherapy with hematopoietic support (22) and whole abdominal radiotherapy (23).

Nevertheless, no randomized trial with regard to consolidation chemotherapy has provided a statistically significant improvement in OS although a small number of phase II studies have suggested improved outcomes (24,25). The only randomized trial with the evidence of clinical benefit was reported by the Southwest Oncology Group/GOG study of ovarian cancer patients receiving 3 versus 12 additional cycles of intravenous paclitaxel following a complete response to platinum and paclitaxel chemotherapy. The study showed a progression-free survival (PFS) advantage of 28 versus 21 months in favor of the 12-cycle arm (hazard ratio = 2.31; 95% confidence interval = 1.08–4.94; P = 0.005). Although survival data were not available because of its early termination by the data safety monitoring committee, there was no difference in OS between the treatment arms as of the date of study closure (17).

The current study demonstrated that consolidation chemotherapy using three additional cycles comprised the best regimen (intravenous paclitaxel and carboplatin), as primary adjuvant chemotherapy did not improve DFS and OS in patients with advanced-stage epithelial ovarian cancer, but who achieved complete response after six cycles of the same regimen, supporting the results of previous reports with regard to the uselessness of consolidation chemotherapy. In a similar study, three cycle consolidation chemotherapy with paclitaxel and platinum-based chemotherapy did not provide a favorable outcome in epithelial ovarian cancer patients with complete response (26).

Moreover, consolidation chemotherapy may increase toxicities in patients with complete response after primary standard therapy. Consolidation chemotherapy using weekly paclitaxel increased the risk for the development of severe peripheral neuropathy when it was administered for 3–12 cycles (9). Three additional cycles of paclitaxel- and platinum-based chemotherapy increased Grade 3 or 4 toxicities in patients with complete response after primary treatment although it was statistically insignificant (26). In the current study, there was a significant increase of Grade 3 or 4 leukopenia in patients who underwent consolidation chemotherapy (P = 0.004).

In conclusion, prolonged use of the preferred chemotherapeutic regimen using paclitaxel and carboplatin may not improve survival in patients with advanced-stage epithelial ovarian cancer who achieved complete response after six cycles of the same chemotherapy, and may increase hematological toxicities, such as Grade 3 or 4 leukopenia.


   Funding
TOP
 Abstract
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 Funding
References
 
Funding to pay the Open Access publication charges for this article was provided by the corresponding author, Dr Noh-Hyun Park.

Conflict of interest statement

None declared.


   Footnotes
 
{dagger} Presented at the 15th International Meeting of The European Society of Gynaecological Oncology, October 29, 2007 Back


   References
TOP
 Abstract
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 Funding
 References
 
1 Jemal A, Siegel R, Ward E, Murray T, Xu J, Smigal C, et al. Cancer statistics, 2006. CA Cancer J Clin (2006) 56:106–30.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

2 Sugiyama T, Ushijima K, Kamura T. New regimens for the treatment of gynecologic cancers. Gan To Kagaku Ryoho (2000) 27:375–81.[Medline]

3 Ozols RF, Bundy BN, Greer BE, Fowler JM, Clarke-Pearson D, Burger RA, et al. Phase III trial of carboplatin and paclitaxel compared with cisplatin and paclitaxel in patients with optimally resected stage III ovarian cancer: a Gynecologic Oncology Group study. J Clin Oncol (2003) 21:3194–200.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

4 Pecorelli S, Benedet JL, Creasman WT, Shepherd JH. FIGO staging of gynecologic cancer. 1994–1997 FIGO Committee on Gynecologic Oncology. International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics. Int J Gynaecol Obstet (1999) 65:243–9.[CrossRef][Medline]

5 Berek J. Berek & Novak‘s gynecology. In: Ovarian and Fallopian Tube Cancer—Berek JS, Natarajan S, eds. (2007) 14th edn. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.

6 Sabbatini P, Spriggs DR. Consolidation for ovarian cancer in remission. J Clin Oncol (2006) 24:537–9.[Free Full Text]

7 Markman M. Consolidation/maintenance chemotherapy for ovarian cancer. Curr Oncol Rep (2003) 5:454–8.[CrossRef][Medline]

8 Skinner EN, Boruta DM, Gehrig PA, Boggess JF, Fowler WC Jr, Van Le L. Consolidation therapy with weekly paclitaxel infusion in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer and primary peritoneal cancer: an extended follow-up. Gynecol Oncol (2005) 98:59–62.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]

9 Micha JP, Goldstein BH, Mattison JA, Bader K, Graham C, Rettenmaier MA, et al. Experience with single-agent paclitaxel consolidation following primary chemotherapy with carboplatin, paclitaxel, and gemcitabine in advanced ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol (2005) 96:132–5.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]

10 Nicoletto MO, Tumolo S, Falci C, Donach M, Visona E, Rosabian A, et al. A randomized study of epithelial ovarian cancer: is chemotherapy useful after complete remission? Int J Med Sci (2004) 1:116–25.[Medline]

11 Panici PB, Maggioni A, Hacker N, Landoni F, Ackermann S, Campagnutta E, et al. Systematic aortic and pelvic lymphadenectomy versus resection of bulky nodes only in optimally debulked advanced ovarian cancer: a randomized clinical trial. J Natl Cancer Inst (2005) 97:560–6.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

12 Miller AB, Hoogstraten B, Staquet M, Winkler A. Reporting results of cancer treatment. Cancer l (1981) 47:207–14.

13 Therasse P, Arbuck SG, Eisenhauer EA, Wanders J, Kaplan RS, Rubinstein L, et al. New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, National Cancer Institute of the United States, National Cancer Institute of Canada. J Natl Cancer Inst (2000) 92:205–16.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

14 Arbuck S, Ivy S, Setser A. The revise common toxicity criteria: version 2.0. CTEP website: http://ctep.info.nih.gov.

15 Heintz AP, Odicino F, Maisonneuve P, Quinn MA, Benedet JL, Creasman WT, et al. Carcinoma of the ovary. FIGO 6th annual report on the results of treatment in gynecological cancer. Int J Gynaecol Obstet (2006) 95:161–92.[CrossRef][Medline]

16 Micha JP, Goldstein BH, Graham C, Rettenmaier MA, Brown JV 3rd, Hu JC, et al. Improved survival with single-agent paclitaxel consolidation/maintenance therapy in advanced ovarian carcinoma. Oncology (2006) 71:49–53.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]

17 Markman M, Liu PY, Wilczynski S, Monk B, Copeland LJ, Alvarez RD, et al. Phase III randomized trial of 12 versus 3 months of maintenance paclitaxel in patients with advanced ovarian cancer after complete response to platinum and paclitaxel-based chemotherapy: a Southwest Oncology Group and Gynecologic Oncology Group trial. J Clin Oncol (2003) 21:2460–5.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

18 DiSilvestro PA, Fisher M, Pearl ML, Buhl A, Chalas E, Valea FA. Pilot phase 2 trial of 4 months of maintenance pegylated liposomal Doxorubicin in patients with advanced ovarian cancer after complete response to platinum and Paclitaxel-based chemotherapy. Gynecol Obstet Invest (2007) 63:1–6.[ISI][Medline]

19 Rocconi RP, Straughn JM Jr, Leath CA 3rd, Kilgore LC, Huh WK, Barnes MN 3rd, et al. Pegylated liposomal doxorubicin consolidation therapy after platinum/paclitaxel-based chemotherapy for suboptimally debulked, advanced-stage epithelial ovarian cancer patients. Oncologist (2006) 11:336–41.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

20 Tournigand C, Louvet C, Molitor JL, Fritel X, Dehni N, Sezeur A, et al. Long-term survival with consolidation intraperitoneal chemotherapy for patients with advanced ovarian cancer with pathological complete remission. Gynecol Oncol (2003) 91:341–5.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]

21 Tournigand C, Louvet C, Molitor JL, Dehni N, Lejeune V, Sezeur A, et al. Intravenous chemotherapy, early debulking surgery, and consolidation intraperitoneal chemotherapy in advanced ovarian carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol (2001) 83:198–204.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]

22 Salerno MG, Ferrandina G, Greggi S, Pierelli L, Menichella G, Leone G, et al. High-dose chemotherapy as a consolidation approach in advanced ovarian cancer: long-term results. Bone Marrow Transplant (2001) 27:1017–25.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]

23 Debby A, Levy T, Hayat H, Brenner Y, Glezerman M, Menczer J. Whole-abdomen, single-dose consolidation radiotherapy in patients with pathologically confirmed complete remission of advanced ovarian epithelial carcinoma: a long-term survival analysis. Int J Gynecol Cancer (2004) 14:794–8.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]

24 Pectasides D, Pectasides E. Maintenance or consolidation therapy in advanced ovarian cancer. Oncology (2006) 70:315–24.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]

25 Dearnley DD, McMeekin DS. Consolidation therapy in ovarian cancer: where do we stand? Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol (2006) 18:3–7.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]

26 Lee SJ, Lee JW, Min JA, Park CS, Kim BG, Lee JH, et al. A pilot study of three-cycle consolidation chemotherapy with paclitaxel and platinum in epithelial ovarian cancer patients with clinical complete response after paclitaxel and platinum chemotherapy. Int J Gynecol Cancer (2006) 16:95–100.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?



This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrowOA All Versions of this Article:
38/6/445    most recent
hyn034v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kim, H. S.
Right arrow Articles by Kang, S.-B.
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Kim, H. S.
Right arrow Articles by Kang, S.-B.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?