Prognostic value of chemotherapy response score in advanced ovarian cancer: a single-center retrospective analysis
Keywords:
Ovarian neoplasms, Neoadjuvant therapy, Survival analysis, Interval debulking surgery, Chemotherapy response score, High-grade serous ovarian carcinoma, Overall survival, Disease-free survivalAbstract
BACKGROUND: Chemotherapy response score (CRS) is a histopathological tool to assess tumor response in patients with high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma (HGSC) undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) followed by interval debulking surgery (IDS).
DESIGN AND SETTING: This single-center retrospective study was conducted at the Faculty of Medicine, Istanbul University. The study included patients treated between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2017, at a tertiary care hospital specializing in gynecologic oncology.
OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to evaluate the prognostic significance of omental and adnexal CRS for predicting overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS).
METHODS: Data from 79 patients with advanced HGSC treated with NACT followed by interval debulking surgery (IDS) between 2010 and 2017 were analyzed. CRS was applied to both omental and adnexal samples, and its association with OS and DFS was evaluated. Statistical analyses were performed using univariate and multivariate methods, with a significance level of P < 0.05.
RESULTS: Omental CRS 1-2 was identified as an independent predictor of decreased OS (HR 2.69; 95% CI 1.26–5.76, P = 0.010), whereas adnexal CRS 1-2 did not significantly impact DFS or OS in multivariate analysis. Patients with omental CRS 3 had superior outcomes, with a 5-year OS rate of 72% compared to 30.8% in the CRS 1–2 group. The median DFS for the CRS 1–2 group was 19 months, while it was 35 months for the CRS 3 group (P = 0.005).
CONCLUSIONS: Omental CRS is a strong independent predictor of OS in advanced HGSC, while adnexal CRS demonstrated limited prognostic value. CRS should be considered in clinical practice for guiding treatment decisions, and further research is warranted to refine its use with molecular and radiologic markers.
Downloads
References
Jemal A, Bray F, Center MM, et al. Global cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin. 2011;61(2):69–90. Erratum in: CA Cancer J Clin. 2011;61(2):134. PMID: 21296855; https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.20107.
Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Dikshit R, et al. Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: sources, methods and major patterns in GLOBOCAN 2012. Int J Cancer. 2015;136(5):E359–E386. PMID: 25220842; https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.29210.
Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2019. CA Cancer J Clin. 2019;69(1):7–34. PMID: 30620402; https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21551.
Du Bois A, Reuss A, Pujade-Lauraine E, et al. Role of surgical outcome as prognostic factor in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer: a combined exploratory analysis of 3 prospectively randomized phase 3 multicenter trials: by the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynaekologische Onkologie Studiengruppe Ovarialkarzinom (AGO-OVAR) and the Groupe d’Investigateurs Nationaux Pour les Etudes des Cancers de l’Ovaire (GINECO). Cancer. 2009;115(6):1234–44. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.24149. Erratum in: Cancer. 2024;130(17):3043–5. PMID: 19189349; https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.35344.
Kehoe S, Hook J, Nankivell M, et al. Primary chemotherapy versus primary surgery for newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer (CHORUS): an open-label, randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial. Lancet. 2015;386(9990):249–57. PMID: 26002111; https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(14)62223-6.
Vergote I, Tropé CG, Amant F, et al.; European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer-Gynaecological Cancer Group; NCIC Clinical Trials Group. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy or primary surgery in stage IIIC or IV ovarian cancer. N Engl J Med. 2010;363(10):943–53. PMID: 20818904; https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa0908806.
Böhm S, Faruqi A, Said I, et al. Chemotherapy response score: development and validation of a system to quantify histopathologic response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in tubo-ovarian high-grade serous carcinoma. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(22):2457–63. PMID: 26124480; https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2014.60.5212.
McCluggage WG, Judge MJ, Clarke BA, et al.; International Collaboration on Cancer Reporting. Data set for reporting of ovary, fallopian tube and primary peritoneal carcinoma: recommendations from the International Collaboration on Cancer Reporting (ICCR). Mod Pathol. 2015;28(8):1101–22. PMID: 26089092; https://doi.org/10.1038/modpathol.2015.77.
Ledermann JA, Matias-Guiu X, Amant F, et al. ESGO-ESMO-ESP consensus conference recommendations on ovarian cancer: pathology and molecular biology and early, advanced and recurrent disease. Ann Oncol. 2024;35(3):248–66. PMID: 38307807; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annonc.2023.11.015.
Lee JY, Chung YS, Na K, et al. External validation of chemotherapy response score system for histopathological assessment of tumor regression after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in tubo-ovarian high-grade serous carcinoma. J Gynecol Oncol. 2017;28(6):e73. PMID: 28758379; https://doi.org/10.3802/jgo.2017.28.e73.
Coghlan E, Meniawy TM, Munro A, et al. Prognostic role of histological tumor regression in patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy for high-grade serous tubo-ovarian carcinoma. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2017;27(4):708–13. PMID: 28441251; https://doi.org/10.1097/IGC.0000000000000945.
Ditzel HM, Strickland KC, Meserve EE, et al. Assessment of a chemotherapy response score (CRS) system for tubo-ovarian high-grade serous carcinoma (HGSC). Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2019;38(3):230–40. PMID: 29750700; https://doi.org/10.1097/PGP.0000000000000513.
Michaan N, Chong WY, Han NY, Lim MC, Park SY. Prognostic value of pathologic chemotherapy response score in patients with ovarian cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2018;28(9):1676–82. PMID: 30256239; https://doi.org/10.1097/IGC.0000000000001366.
Santoro A, Angelico G, Piermattei A, et al. Pathological chemotherapy response score in patients affected by high grade serous ovarian carcinoma: the prognostic role of omental and ovarian residual disease. Front Oncol. 2019;9:778. PMID: 31482065; https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2019.00778.
Böhm S, Le N, Lockley M, Brockbank E, et al. Histopathologic response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy as a prognostic biomarker in tubo-ovarian high-grade serous carcinoma: updated chemotherapy response score (CRS) results. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2019;29(2):353–6. PMID: 30683759; https://doi.org/10.1136/ijgc-2018-000092.
Zorzato PC, Zannoni GF, Tudisco R, et al. External validation of a “response score” after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma with complete clinical response. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2020;30(1):67–73. PMID: 31754067; https://doi.org/10.1136/ijgc-2019-000561.
Lawson BC, Euscher ED, Bassett RL, et al. A 3-tier chemotherapy response score for ovarian/fallopian tube/peritoneal high-grade serous carcinoma: is it clinically relevant? Am J Surg Pathol. 2020;44(2):206–13. PMID: 31651523; https://doi.org/10.1097/PAS.0000000000001391.
Liontos M, Andrikopoulou A, Koutsoukos K, et al. Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio and chemotherapy response score as prognostic markers in ovarian cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. J Ovarian Res. 2021;14(1):148. PMID: 34724958; https://doi.org/10.1186/s13048-021-00902-0.
Cohen PA, Powell A, Böhm S, et al.; HGSC CRS collaborative network (supplementary 1); Singh N. Pathological chemotherapy response score is prognostic in tubo-ovarian high-grade serous carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis of individual patient data. Gynecol Oncol. 2019;154(2):441–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2019.04.679. Erratum in: Gynecol Oncol. 2020;157(2):558–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2020.02.023. Erratum in: Gynecol Oncol. 2021;161(1):328–9. PMID: 31118141; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2021.01.032.
Santoro A, Travaglino A, Inzani F, et al. Prognostic value of chemotherapy response score (CRS) assessed on the adnexa in ovarian high-grade serous carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Diagnostics (Basel). 2022;12(3):633. PMID: 35328186; https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics12030633.
Rodolakis I, Pergialiotis V, Liontos M, et al. Chemotherapy response score in ovarian cancer patients: an overview of its clinical utility. J Clin Med. 2023;12(6):2155. PMID: 36983157; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm12062155.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 São Paulo Medical Journal
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
