Open Access

REVIEW

Primary Debulking Surgery Versus Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Advanced Ovarian Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of All Randomized Clinical Trials with Subgroup Analysis by Patient Profile

Carlo Ronsini^1,*, Giuseppe Cucinella¹, Maria Cristina Solazzo¹, Mariano Catello Di Donna¹, Cono Scaffa¹, Stefano Cianci², Manuela Ludovisi³, Sandro Pignata⁴, Vito Chiantera¹

1 Unit of Gynecologic Oncology, National Cancer Institute, IRCCS, Fondazione “G. Pascale”, Naples, Italy
2 Unit of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Policlinico “G. Martino”, Department of Human Pathology of Adult and Childhood “G. Barresi”, University of Messina, Messina, Italy
3 Department of Life, Health and Environmental Sciences, University of L’ Aquila, L’ Aquila, Italy
4 Medical Oncology Division B, National Cancer Institute, G Pascale Foundation, Naples, Italy

* Corresponding Author: Carlo Ronsini. Email:

(This article belongs to the Special Issue: Novel Drug Targets and Combination Strategies in Gynecologic Cancers)

Oncology Research 2026, 34(5), 3 https://doi.org/10.32604/or.2026.074934

Received 21 October 2025; Accepted 05 February 2026; Issue published 22 April 2026

Abstract

Background: The optimal sequencing of surgery and chemotherapy in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer remains debated. While primary debulking surgery (PDS) has been considered the standard approach, recent randomized trials have questioned its survival advantage over neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) followed by interval debulking surgery (IDS). The study aimed to systematically evaluate phase III randomized controlled trials comparing PDS and NACT. Methods: Following PRISMA guidelines (PROSPERO ID 1169057), PubMed and Scopus were systematically searched in October 2025 for phase III randomized clinical trials evaluating cytoreductive strategies in ovarian carcinoma. Only full-text English studies reporting overall survival (OS) or disease-free survival (DFS) were included. Risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. Results: Five phase III trials (EORTC 55971, CHORUS, JCOG0602, SCORPION, TRUST) comprising 2296 patients met the inclusion criteria. PDS (n = 1139) and NACT (n = 1157) showed comparable OS (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.94–1.03, p = 0.55, I² = 0%) and DFS (PDS RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.95–1.02, p = 0.27, I² = 0%). Subgroup analyses confirmed the absence of significant differences for patients with CC0 (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.87–1.05, p = 0.35, I² = 0%), FIGO stage III disease (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.92–1.03, p = 0.34, I² = 0%), or age under 70 years (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.97–1.09, p = 0.38, I² = 0%). Conclusions: PDS and NACT provide no significant survival outcomes in advanced ovarian cancer. No clear survival benefit for PDS was observed. Refinement of patient selection, integration of predictive biomarkers, and re-evaluation of PDS in the context of HIPEC and Poly-ADP-Ribose Polymerase (PARP) inhibitor use are warranted to guide individualized treatment strategies.

---

Keywords

---

Supplementary Material

Supplementary Material File

---