TY - JOUR T1 - Does the Diagnosis Center Influence the Prognosis of Ovarian Cancer Patients Submitted to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy? JF - Anticancer Research JO - Anticancer Res SP - 3027 LP - 3032 VL - 35 IS - 5 AU - GIUSEPPE VIZZIELLI AU - FRANCESCO FANFANI AU - VITO CHIANTERA AU - LUCIA TORTORELLA AU - ALESSANDRO LUCIDI AU - MARCO PETRILLO AU - BARBARA COSTANTINI AU - GIOVANNI SCAMBIA AU - ANNA FAGOTTI Y1 - 2015/05/01 UR - http://ar.iiarjournals.org/content/35/5/3027.abstract N2 - Aim: To compare prognosis of advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (AEOC) patients based on where the first surgical assessment was performed. Patients and Methods: Retrospective analysis of primary AEOC patients was performed and three groups were formed based on where the decision of primary treatment was taken: Internal, if the decision was carried out at our Institution (PDS (Primary Debulking Surgery), I-IDS (Internal-Interval Debulking Surgery)) and Referred in case women were referred after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) from other Centers (R-IDS (Referred-Interval Debulking Surgery)). Results: Among 573 AEOC, 279 (48.7%) were PDS and 294 (51.3%) IDS. In particular, 134 of 294 (45.6%) were R-IDS and 160 (54.4%) were I-IDS. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 26 months in PDS, 14 months in I-IDS and 17 months in R-IDS. The difference was statistically significant (p<0.05) among all groups. Conclusion: IDS can represent a suitable approach only when the first complete debulking is not achievable in a tertiary referral hospital. ER -