Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 17, 2025
Thermal Ablation for the Treatment of Abdominal Tumors
Published on: March 7, 2011
Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy After Interval Cytoreductive Surgery for Patients With Advanced-Stage
Jung-Yun Lee1, Yong Jae Lee1, Joo-Hyuk Son2
1Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Institute of Women's Life Medical Science, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Importance:
Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) followed by interval cytoreductive surgery (ICS) has shown survival benefits for patients with advanced-stage ovarian cancer. However, there is still a lack of consensus regarding the integration of HIPEC into clinical practice.
Objective:
To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of ICS with HIPEC compared with ICS alone in clinical practice for patients with advanced-stage ovarian cancer.
Design, Setting, And Participants:
This prospective, multicenter, comparative effectiveness cohort study enrolled 205 patients with stage III or IV ovarian cancer who had received at least 3 cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by ICS with HIPEC or ICS without HIPEC at 7 Korean Gynecologic Oncology Group institutions between September 1, 2017, and April 22, 2022. Nine patients were excluded because they did not meet the inclusion criteria.
Exposures:
Neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by ICS with HIPEC or ICS without HIPEC.
Main Outcomes And Measures:
The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Overall survival (OS) and the safety profile were the key secondary end points.
Results:
This study included 196 patients (median age, 58.0 years [range, 38-82 years]), of whom 109 underwent ICS with HIPEC and 87 underwent ICS without HIPEC. The median duration of follow-up was 28.2 months (range, 3.5-58.6 months). Disease recurrence occurred in 128 patients (65.3%), and 30 patients (15.3%) died. Interval cytoreductive surgery with HIPEC was associated with a significant improvement in median PFS compared with ICS without HIPEC (22.9 months [95% CI, 3.5-58.6 months] vs 14.2 months [95% CI, 4.0-56.2 months]; P = .005) and median OS (not reached [95% CI, 3.5 months to not reached] vs 53.0 [95% CI, 4.6-56.2 months]; P = .002). The frequency of grade 3 or 4 postoperative complications was similar in both groups (ICS with HIPEC, 3 of 109 [2.8%] vs ICS without HIPEC, 3 of 87 [3.4%]; P > .99). Among patients with recurrence, the frequency of peritoneal recurrence was lower in the ICS with HIPEC group than in the ICS without HIPEC group (21 of 64 [32.8%] vs 41 of 64 [64.1%]; P = .001).
Conclusions And Relevance:
This study suggests that ICS in conjunction with HIPEC was associated with longer PFS and OS than ICS without HIPEC for patients with advanced-stage ovarian cancer and was not associated with higher rates of postoperative complications. The lower rate of peritoneal recurrence after HIPEC may be associated with improved OS.
