Consolidation with intraperitoneal cisplatin in first-line therapy of advanced ovarian cancer

Seventy-five patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer were treated with a combined modality regimen of systemic, induction chemotherapy followed by intraperitoneal therapy (IPT). All patients underwent initial surgery for staging and/or cytoreduction followed by cisplatin 20 mg/m2 intravenously (IV) for 5 days and cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m2 on day 4 every 3 to 4 weeks for two to four cycles. Patients were then evaluated for IPT and, if eligible, had an intraperitoneal (IP) catheter placed. IPT consisted of cisplatin 60 mg/m2 in 2 L on day 1 and IV cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m2 on day 2 every 3 weeks for three to six cycles. Patients who demonstrated a clinical complete response (CCR) were then referred for second-look laparotomy (SLL). Of 71 patients who completed the induction phase, 53 (75%) were eligible for IPT, and 49 patients entered the therapy phase. Toxicity of the combined modality approach was acceptable and did not differ from our previous experience using the same drugs systemically. Thirty-two of the 49 patients who completed IPT achieved a CCR, which was confirmed by SLL in 20 patients. Twenty recurrences were documented in the 32 CCR patients, 13 occurred in patients after SLL. Projected median survival of all patients is 38 months. Median survival correlated with amount of residual disease following initial surgery (23 months for bulky v 45 months for minimal residual; P less than .001) and with performance status ([PS]; 24 months for PS 2, 3 v greater than 46 months for PS O; P less than .001). Patients who presented with bulky tumors were less likely to reach the consolidation IPT phase. Incorporation of IP cisplatin into the first-line regimen for treatment of ovarian cancer does not appear to have major impact on the survival of all treated patients when compared with our historical control series. Combined IV and IPT cisplatin and cyclophosphamide is feasible with acceptable toxicity. Its impact on response and survival may be limited to only "good-prognosis" patients.