# Survival Difference in Advanced-Stage Cervical and Ovarian Cancer Patients Treated with Concomitant Modulated Electro-Hyperthermia in Comparison to Classic Treatment Modalities: Results of a Pilot Study and Meta-Analysis

## TL;DR

A pilot study and meta-analysis found that modulated electro-hyperthermia (mEHT) improved survival rates in advanced cervical cancer patients compared to standard treatments, but more research is needed for ovarian cancer.

## Contribution

This study is the first to conduct a meta-analysis on mEHT's efficacy in cervical and ovarian cancer, revealing survival benefits in cervical cancer.

## Key findings

- mEHT-treated cervical cancer patients had a 78.13% 2-year survival rate, significantly higher than controls.
- Ovarian cancer patients treated with mEHT had a 32.83% 2-year survival rate, but more research is needed.
- Institutional data supported the meta-analysis findings for cervical cancer.

## Abstract

Background: Modulated electro-hyperthermia (mEHT) is one of the latest advancements in the field of oncological hyperthermia. Previous studies investigating mEHT revealed that it is safe and effective; however, no meta-analysis was conducted either in cervical or ovarian cancer. Methods: A single-institute pilot case series and a meta-analysis were conducted. Advanced stage cervical and ovarian cancer cases were included. In the pilot study, mEHT treatments were conducted using the Oncotherm EHY-2000+ and the EHY-2030 devices with 2–3 treatment sessions per week. Results: For the meta-analysis, a total of five studies were identified, with 160 and 31 cervical and ovarian cancer patients, respectively. In addition, 175 standard-of-care-treated cervical cancer patients were also identified as controls. The 1- and 2-year survival rate of the cervical cancer patients treated with mEHT was 87.61% [95% confidence interval (CI): 71.31–100%] and 78.13% (95% CI: 53.02–100%). Compared to the controls, the 2-year survival rates (78.13% vs. 58.86%) were significantly better in the mEHT-treated cohorts (odds ratio: 0.4143, p = 0.0441; hazard rate: 0.6607, p = 0.0103). The 1- and 2-year survival rates of ovarian cancer patients were 45.46% (95% CI: 5.97–84.95%) and 32.83% (95% CI: 0–79.57%), respectively. The result of our institutional data strengthened the results of the meta-analysis. Conclusions: Using mEHT, a significantly higher 2-year survival rate can be achieved in cervical cancer. In this setting, a wider testing/application of the modality is warranted. In the case of ovarian tumors, the available knowledge is minimal, and applicability and efficacy studies are urgently needed.