Loading clinical trials...
Loading clinical trials...
Role of Laparoscopy in Assessing Tumor Resectability in Ovarian Cancer Cases
Aim of Work is Prevention of unnecessary laparotomies and failed attempts to perform optimal cytoreduction in women with advanced ovarian cancer.
Ovarian cancer is diagnosed at advanced stages in 80% of cases, leading to 5-year survival of approximately 30 %. Tumor reductive surgery and platinum and taxane-based chemotherapy has been the mainstay of treatment for advanced disease . The presence of residual disease after primary debulking surgery is a highly significant prognostic factor in women with advanced ovarian cancer. In up to 60 % of women, residual tumor of \>1 cm is left behind after primary debulking surgery. These women might have benefited from neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) prior to interval debulking surgery instead of primary debulking surgery followed by chemotherapy. Previous studies have demonstrated a clear survival benefit if resection to no gross residual disease (R0 resection) can be achieved, More extensive surgical procedures have been performed to achieve R0 status and have been associated with increased surgical morbidity. Accurate assessment of tumor burden at initial diagnosis using preoperative computed tomography, serum CA 125, and clinical factors has been used in models with variable success and has been difficult to standardize across surgical practices. It is important to determine at the time of diagnosis which patients should undergo primary tumor reductive surgery (TRS), and which should receive neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) in order to minimize surgical morbidity and maximize the extent of cytoreduction. As such, several algorithms to predict the extent of disease encountered at cytoreductive surgery have been developed and evaluated . Fagotti et al. (2008) developed a laparoscopic scoring algorithm comprised of seven parameters: omental caking, peritoneal carcinomatosis, diaphragmatic carcinomatosis, mesenteric retraction, bowel infiltration, stomach infiltration, and liver metastases. . A laparoscopy-based scoring model developed by Fagotti et al.,(2008) demonstrated that a predictive index value score of 8 or greater had a specificity of 100%, positive predictive value of 100%, and negative predictive value of 70% for predicting a suboptimal primary tumor reductive surgery. Optimal tumor reductive surgery was defined as 1 cm or less in this model . Follow-up studies have demonstrated that laparoscopic scoring carries a low risk of complications; helps avoid unnecessary laparotomies in patients in whom cytoreduction to no gross residual disease would not be possible. To provide a more standardized approach to the management of patients with advanced ovarian cancer, this study will be performed to triage appropriate patients to laparoscopic scoring assessment using the previously validated scoring algorithm as reported by Fagotti, We will estimate the effects of the laparoscopic scoring algorithm in patients with advanced ovarian cancer to improve complete gross surgical resection rates and to determine the resulting clinical outcomes.
Age
All ages
Sex
FEMALE
Healthy Volunteers
No
Faculty of Medicine, Zagazig Univeristy
Zagazig, Sharqia Province, Egypt
Start Date
December 9, 2019
Primary Completion Date
December 9, 2021
Completion Date
April 9, 2022
Last Updated
October 4, 2022
30
ACTUAL participants
laparoscopy then primary cytoreductive surgery
PROCEDURE
laparoscopy then neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by interval cytoreductive surgery
PROCEDURE
Lead Sponsor
Zagazig University
NCT04550494
NCT05039801
Data Source & Attribution
This clinical trial information is sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov, a service of the U.S. National Institutes of Health.
Modifications: This data has been reformatted for display purposes. Eligibility criteria have been parsed into inclusion/exclusion sections. Location data has been geocoded to enable distance-based search. For the authoritative and most current information, please visit ClinicalTrials.gov.
Neither the United States Government nor Clareo Health make any warranties regarding the data. Check ClinicalTrials.gov frequently for updates.
View ClinicalTrials.gov Terms and Conditions