title: CA-125-indicated asymptomatic relapse confers survival benefit to ovarian cancer patients who underwent secondary cytoreduction surgery.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  There is no consensus regarding the management of ovarian cancer patients, who have shown complete clinical response (CCR) to primary therapy and have rising cancer antigen CA-125 levels but have no symptoms of recurrent disease. The present study aims to determine whether follow-up CA-125 levels can be used to identify the need for imaging studies and secondary cytoreductive surgery (CRS).
  
  
  METHODS
  We identified 410 ovarian cancer patients treated at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center between 1984 and 2011. These patients had shown CCR to primary therapy. Follow-up was conducted based on the surveillance protocol of the MD Anderson Cancer Center. We used the Cox proportional hazards model and log-rank test to assess the associations between the follow-up CA-125 levels and secondary CRS and survival duration.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The CA-125 level of 1.68 × nadir was defined as the indicator of recurrent disease (p < 0.001). The specificity and sensitivity of this criterion were 82.9% and 85.6%, respectively, and the median lead-time of the CA-125 biochemical progression prior to clinically-defined relapse was 31 days (ranging from 1 to 391 days). The median number of the negative imaging studies for the clinical relapse findings in patients with a CA-125 level of < 1.68 × nadir was 3 (ranging from 0 to 24 times). The increase of CA-125 level at relapse was an independent predictor of overall and progression free survival in patients who had shown CCR to primary therapy (p = 0.04 and 0.02 respectively). The overall and progression free survival durations in patients with a CA-125 level ≤ 1.68 × nadir at relapse (69.4 and 13.8 months) were longer than those with a CA-125 level > 1.68 × nadir at relapse (55.7 and 10.4 months; p = 0.04 and 0.01, respectively). The overall and progression free survival duration of patients with asymptomatic relapse and underwent a secondary CRS was longer than that of patients with symptomatic relapse (p = 0.02 and 0.04 respectively).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The increase of serum CA-125 levels is an early warning of clinical relapse in ovarian cancer. Using CA-125 levels in guiding the treatment of patients with asymptomatic recurrent ovarian cancer, who have shown CCR to primary therapy, can facilitate optimal secondary CRS and extend the survival duration of the patients.
authors: Department of Pathology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, 77030, USA. cxxxxcyd@gmail.com.
authors: Fang
authors: F
authors: Wang
authors: Yanfen
authors: Y
authors: Ye
authors: Xia
authors: X
authors: Xu
authors: Xuehui
authors: X
authors: Zhou
authors: Jinhua
authors: J
authors: Wang
authors: Xiaoxiang
authors: X
authors: Chen
references: J Clin Oncol. 2002 Mar 1;20(5):1161-3
references: 11870155
references: J Clin Oncol. 1997 Dec;15(12):3507-14
references: 9396404
references: J Nucl Med. 2009 May;50 Suppl 1:122S-50S
references: 19403881
references: Gynecol Oncol. 2007 Nov;107(2):173-6
references: 17950384
references: Ann Surg Oncol. 2006 Dec;13(12):1702-10
references: 17009163
references: Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2004 Jun 15;114(2):228-33
references: 15140520
references: Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2007 Jan-Feb;17(1):21-31
references: 17291227
references: Gynecol Oncol. 1994 Dec;55(3 Pt 2):S1-3
references: 7835792
references: Eur J Cancer. 2009 Jan;45(2):228-47
references: 19097774
references: Oncologist. 2002;7 Suppl 5:20-8
references: 12324630
references: Gynecol Oncol. 1998 Jul;70(1):2-12
references: 9698465
references: J Clin Oncol. 2001 Oct 15;19(20):4054-7
references: 11600607
references: Semin Oncol. 2003 Jun;30(3):401-12
references: 12870142
references: Ann Oncol. 1997 Oct;8(10):963-8
references: 9402168
references: Gynecol Oncol. 2005 Mar;96(3):906-7; author reply 907
references: 15721450
references: Gynecol Oncol. 2010 May;117(2):336-40
references: 20153027
references: Eur J Radiol. 2009 Jul;71(1):164-74
references: 18378417
references: Ann Oncol. 1996 Apr;7(4):361-4
references: 8805927
references: Cancer. 1976 Jul;38(1):388-94
references: 947531
references: Gynecol Oncol. 1999 Apr;73(1):170-1
references: 10094903
references: Gynecol Oncol. 2011 May 1;121(2):249-52
references: 21300398
references: J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2007 Nov-Dec;31(6):868-75
references: 18043348
references: Gynecol Oncol. 2009 Jan;112(1):265-74
references: 18937969
references: Lancet. 2010 Oct 2;376(9747):1155-63
references: 20888993
references: Br J Cancer. 2012 Feb 14;106(4):633-7
references: 22240800
references: J Clin Oncol. 2004 Oct 15;22(20):4051-8
references: 15364966
references: N Engl J Med. 2004 Dec 9;351(24):2519-29
references: 15590954
references: J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000 Feb 2;92(3):205-16
references: 10655437
references: Lancet Oncol. 2007 Sep;8(9):813-21
references: 17765190
references: Ann Surg Oncol. 2009 May;16(5):1324-30
references: 19225844
references: J Clin Oncol. 2002 Mar 1;20(5):1158-60
references: 11870154
references: Radiology. 2000 Jun;215(3):761-7
references: 10831697
references: Ann Oncol. 1990 Jul;1(4):301-2
references: 2265140
references: Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 1999 Jun;65(3):243-9
references: 10428343
references: J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000 Sep 20;92(18):1534-5
references: 10995813
references: Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2011 Jul;21(5):831-6
references: 21613957
references: CA Cancer J Clin. 2013 Jan;63(1):11-30
references: 23335087