Primary peritoneal serous cancer (PPSC), the main subtype of primary peritoneal cancer, comes from the peritoneum (internal skin lining in your abdomen) and leads to diffuse cancerous growths in the abdomen and pelvis. Clinically, women with this condition present with very similar findings and imaging results and blood tests as do those with advanced serous epithelial ovarian cancer (ASOC). Nevertheless, the ovaries of PPSC people are rarely affected, and is much more rare than ASOC. In fact, it has been reported that the occurrence of ASOC is 4 times more than that of PPSC. In most instances, the treatment and monitoring of the two diseases is the same and also the end results have actually been thought to be very comparable.
A study by Li and coworkers, just published in the Journal of Ovarian Research, suggests that these 2 diseases differ extensively in regards to prognosis. People diagnosed with PPSC and also ASOC from 2010 to 2015 from the NCI (SEER) database were reviewed. A statistical test called Pearson’s chi-square test was utilized to contrast scientific functions. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) differences. The Kaplan-Meier method (a very commonly used method for survival review) and also log-rank examination was made use of to execute the survival evaluation. Tendency rating matching was likewise carried out. Univariate, multivariate, as well as subgroup analyses, were carried out making use of the Cox symmetrical risks model. This is all scientific and statistical jargon but means that his data was very closely looked at to see if there was a difference in outcomes.
An overall of 708 PPSC patients and 7610 women with ASOC were enrolled in this study review. The scientific attributes of PPSC people were visibly different from those of ASOC people. The survival analysis showed that PPSC patients had poorer end results than ASOC patients. Even after the medical functions were well balanced, PPSC people still had poorer survival. Univariate and also multivariate analyses (meaning looking at one vs multiple factors at one time) indicated that older age, higher tumor grade (what it looks like under the microscope) as well as advanced American Joint Committee on Cancer stage were adverse prognostic factors, while surgery as well as chemo treatment were protective aspects. A subgroup evaluation showed that a lot of variables favored ASOC individual outcomes. The overall distant metastasis rates of PPSC and ASOC were comparable. Liver or lung metastasis was common, however bone as well as central nervous system (brain)metastases were rare. A greater percentage of liver metastasis was observed in the ASOC patients.
This study demonstrated that the medical attributes and prognosis of PPSC patients, as well as ASOC individuals, were clearly different. PPSC patients had an inferior OS (lower cure rate) compared to that of ASOC clients. Furthermore, many variables in the subgroup evaluation were demonstrated to be negative variables for PPSC compared to ASOC. Unfortunately, while the treatment is currently the same, PPSC is much more aggressive as well as has a poorer prognosis than ASOC. Newer molecular analyses and studies will continue to address why there are differences and hopefully shed light on better molecularly targeted therapies.