Printer Friendly

Rx for change: oncologists avoid using the best treatment for ovarian cancer.

Why is an ovarian cancer treatment that saves women's lives being underused? Using intraperitoneal (IP) chemotherapy (infusing chemotherapy into the abdomen) along with intravenous chemotherapy (IV chemo, which is infused into veins) dramatically extends lives in women with ovarian cancer. Yet, a recent study found that only 41 percent of women treated at 6 academic centers received IP chemotherapy treatment. You may be thinking that it takes time for word about a major treatment advance like this to get out. A reasonable thought, but it turns out that information about this life-extending treatment has been available for almost a decade!

In 2006, the Gynecologic Oncology Group, a cancer research group, reported that a randomized trial called "GOG-172" demonstrated that IP chemotherapy improved median overall survival by 16 months--a huge accomplishment. So huge, in fact, that the National Cancer Institute sent physicians a Clinical Announcement, which is a rarely used communication tool for advances so important that practice should change immediately. (1) IP/IV chemotherapy use did increase from 33 percent in 2006, to nearly 50 percent in 2008--but hasn't increased since then.

There was already plenty of evidence that IP chemotherapy worked. Trials of IP chemotherapy began in 1986, and almost every study showed a dramatic benefit in extending life. These results have been repeated over the years. In fact, just a few weeks ago, a study was published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology that looked at whether the procedure is effective in "real-world" practice (as opposed to in clinical trials) and how often IP chemotherapy was used at six hospitals that are part of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network, an elite alliance of cancer centers. (2)

Among 823 women with stage III ovarian cancer who had all had optimal surgery that removed all visible signs of tumor, overall survival at three years was 81 percent for women who had IP and IV chemotherapy compared with 71 percent for women who only received IV chemotherapy. These results mirrored previous studies, and demonstrated that IP chemotherapy works in the real world setting, where physicians may use different drugs and doses of drugs.

So, why do only 41 percent of eligible ovarian cancer patients receive IP chemo in cancer centers that pride themselves on using evidence-based treatment? It's unclear. The researchers cite causes for the low rate that include, vaguely, "local culture and clinical practice leaders' enthusiasm for treatments and clinical trials." The New York Times quotes Dr. Maurie Markman, the President of Medicine and Science at the Cancer Treatment Centers of America, as saying that this treatment requires no new drugs or devices, so manufacturers aren't educating physicians about it. (3)

Let's expand on that a moment. Oncologists profit personally from some of the drugs they recommend, because physicians are allowed to profit from drugs they administer in their offices. They do not profit off chemo drugs that are taken at home. So, an oncologist who writes a prescription for an oral therapy makes no money off it; but, if a treatment is administered in the physician's office, he can charge for the procedure and profit from the drug that's used. If the drug chosen is expensive, the oncologist makes more money. This is very bad for patients, because oncologists may push drugs that are administered in the office instead of oral drugs.

This case is a bit different, but still Involves physicians' reluctance to change practice habits when doing so affects their profits. IP chemotherapy takes time and uses older, less-expensive chemo drugs--usually cisplatin and paclitaxel. So physicians may choose to use IV chemo because it's simpler and faster to administer than IP chemo. Because IV chemo takes less time, the physician can see more patients--and make more money. And oncologists may choose to use newer, branded drugs instead of the classic drugs used in IP chemo, because administering newer drugs is more profitable.

Depressed yet? We are. Deborah K. Armstrong, a Johns Hopkins professor who led the 2006 study that showed IP chemo's large survival benefit, says that the data are now so strong that oncologists have "no more excuses" not to use IP. (4) Oh, they'll find an excuse. There is plenty of evidence that physicians ignore evidence. Give this column to anyone you know with ovarian cancer and encourage them to seek care from providers who use the most effective treatment--and count on the National Women's Health Network to provide you with science-based evidence you can use.


(1.) National Cancer Institute, NCI Clinical Announcement: Intraperitoneal chemotherapy for ovarian cancer, Bethesda MD: NCI, January 6, 2006. Available online at:

(2.) Wright AA, Cronin A, Milne DA et al., "Use and effectiveness of intraperitoneal chemotherapy for treatment of ovarian cancer," J din One. 2015;33:1-12. Published online before print August 3, 2015, doi: 10.1200/JC0.2015.61.4776 Available online at:

(3.) Grady D, "Effective Ovarian Cancer Treatment Is Underused, Study Finds," New York Times, August 3, 2015, page A-13. Available online at: http://www.

(4.) Grady D, "Effective Ovarian Cancer Treatment Is Underused, Study Finds," New York Times, August 3, 2015, page A-13. Available online at: http://www.

In Honor Of & Memorial Donor List


The National Women's Health Network wishes to thank everyone for their generous donations.

Phyllis Chester Ph.D.

In Memory of Barbara Seaman

Judy Costlow

In Honor of Edith E. Adams

Mary Espenshade

In Memory of Betty G. Espenshade

JoAnne Fischer

In Honor of NWHN's 40th Anniversary

Barbara Gasdick

In Memory of Helen

Samantha Haudenschield

In Honor of Mildred Rudasill & Mary Dunahue

Nancy Kovitz

In Honor of the Birthday of Kirsten Laurin-Kovitz

Ellen Leopold

In Memory of Jean Hardisty

Anne Maron

In Honor of Jo Reichler

Dr. James A. McGregor & Suzi McGregor

In Honor of Sherry Breidenthal

Mari Mennel-Bell

In Honor of Cindy Pearson & NWHN's 40th Anniversary

Sharon Stewart

In Honor of Charlea T. Massion, M.D.

Jane Warren

In Memory of Joan R. Thomas

This list reflects gifts received through July 15, 2015. If your name is missing, incorrectly listed, or misspelled, please accept our sincere apology, and contact our Membership Department at 202.682.2640.

September is Ovarian Cancer Awareness Month!

Take charge of your health and use the following ovarian cancer information to advocate for yourself!


* Ovarian cancer is the 5th leading cause of cancer deaths among U.S. women, and accounts for 3% of cancers in U.S. women

* A woman's lifetime risk of developing ovarian cancer is 1 in 75

* Ovarian cancer rates are highest in women aged 55-64

* Around 21,000 women are diagnosed each year in the U.S.

* Approximately 1 in 10 cases are hereditary, attributed primarily to mutations in the BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes


Early detection improves survival, but many of ovarian cancer's symptoms are also caused by other things. The main symptoms are:

* Bloating

* Pelvic or abdominal pain

* Difficulty eating or feeling full quickly

* Urinary symptoms


See a gynecologist right away if you have these symptoms daily for more than a few weeks. Prompt medical detection leads to early diagnosis and improved outcomes!


The standard treatment for ovarian cancer includes surgery to remove visible tumors followed by chemotherapy.


* Ovarian Cancer National Alliance:

* National Ovarian Cancer Coalition:

* American Cancer Society:

Charlea T. Massion, MD, is a NWHN Board member, family physician and specialist in hospice and palliative care medicine. She is the Chief Medical Director of Hospice of Santa Cruz County and also teaches physicians about work-life balance and career development.

Adriane Fugh-Berman, MD, is an associate professor in the Georgetown University Medical Center; a former chair of the NWHN Board of Directors; and director of PharmedOut, which educates prescribers about pharmaceutical marketing techniques.
COPYRIGHT 2015 National Women's Health Network
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2015 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Author:Massion, Charlea T.; Fugh-Berman, Adrianne
Publication:Women's Health Activist
Date:Sep 1, 2015
Previous Article:The network in action: raising women's voices for the health care we need.
Next Article:The times, they are a-changing.

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2019 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters