Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention

  • 제15권2호
  • /
  • Pages.887-890
  • /
  • 2014
  • /
  • 1513-7368(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2476-762X(eISSN)
아시아태평양암예방학회 (Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Locoregional Spread and Survival of Stage IIA1 versus Stage IIA2 Cervical Cancer

  • Hongladaromp, Waroonsiri (Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University) ;
  • Tantipalakorn, Charuwan (Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University) ;
  • Charoenkwan, Kittipat (Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University) ;
  • Srisomboon, Jatupol (Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University)
  • 발행 : 2014.01.30
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

This study was undertaken to compare surgical outcomes and survival rates of patients with the 2009 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage IIA1 versus IIA2 cervical cancer treated with radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy (RHPL). Patients with stage IIA cervical cancer undergoing primary RHPL between January 2003 and December 2012 at Chiang Mai University Hospital were retrospectively reviewed. The analysis included clinicopathologic variables, i.e. nodal metastasis, parametrial involvement, positive surgical margins, deep stromal invasion (DSI)), lymph-vascular space invasion (LVSI), adjuvant treatment, and 5-year survival. The chi square test, Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test were used for statistical analysis. During the study period, 133 women with stage IIA cervical cancer, 101 (75.9 %) stage IIA1, and 32 (24.1 %) stage IIA2 underwent RHPL. The clinicopathologic variables of stage IIA1 compared with stage IIA2 were as follows: nodal metastasis (38.6% vs 40.6%, p=0.84), parametrial involvement (10.9% vs 15.6%, p=0.47), positive surgical margins (31.7% vs 31.3%, p=1.0), DSI (39.6% vs 53.1%, p=0.18), LVSI (52.5% vs 71.9%, p=0.05) and adjuvant radiation (72.3% vs 84.4%, p=0.33). With a median follow-up of 60 months, the 5-year disease-free survival (84.6% vs 88.7%, p=0.67) and the 5-year overall survival (83.4% vs 90.0%, P=0.49) did not significantly differ between stage IIA1 and stage IIA2 cervical cancer. In conclusion, patients with stage IIA1 and stage IIA2 cervical cancer have comparable rates of locoregional spread and survival. The need for receiving adjuvant radiation was very high in both substages. The revised 2009 FIGO system did not demonstrate significant survival differences in stage IIA cervical cancer treated with radical hysterectomy. Concurrent chemoradiation should be considered a more suitable treatment for patients with stage IIA cervical cancer.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Covens A, Rosen B, Murphy J, et al (2002). How important is removal of the parametrium at surgery for carcinoma of the cervix? Gynecol Oncol, 84, 145-9. https://doi.org/10.1006/gyno.2001.6493
  2. Delgado G, Bundy B, Zaino R, et al (1990). Prospective surgicalpathological study of disease-free interval in patients with stage IB squamous cell carcinoma of the cervix: a Gynecologic Oncology Group study. Gynecol Oncol, 38, 352-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/0090-8258(90)90072-S
  3. Ferlay J, Shin HR, Bray F, et al (2010). Estimates of worldwide burden of cancer in 2008: GLOBOCAN 2008. Int J Cancer, 127, 2893-7. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.25516
  4. Frumovitz M, Sun CC, Schmeler KM, et al (2009). Parametrial involvement in radical hysterectomy specimens for women with early-stage cervical cancer. Obstet Gynecol, 114, 93-9. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181ab474d
  5. Garg G, Shah JP, Toy EP, et al (2011). Stage IIA1 versus stage IIA2 cervical cancer: does the new staging criteria predict survival? Int J Gynecol Cancer, 21, 711-6. https://doi.org/10.1097/IGC.0b013e3182138648
  6. Ho CM, Chien TY, Huang SH, et al (2004). Multivariate analysis of the prognostic factors and outcomes in early cervical cancer patients undergoing radical hysterectomy. Gynecol Oncol, 93, 458-64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2004.01.026
  7. Hopkins MP, Morley GW (1991). Radical hysterectomy versus radiation therapy for stage IB squamous cell cancer of the cervix. Cancer, 68, 272-7. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0142(19910715)68:2<272::AID-CNCR2820680210>3.0.CO;2-X
  8. Horn LC, Fischer U, Raptis G, et al (2007). Tumor size is of prognostic value in surgically treated FIGO stage II cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol, 107, 310-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2007.06.026
  9. Hosaka M, Watari H, Mitamura T, et al (2011). Survival and prognosticators of node-positive cervical cancer patients treated with radical hysterectomy and systematic lymphadenectomy. Int J Clin Oncol, 16, 33-8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10147-010-0123-0
  10. Jemal A, Bray F, Center MM, et al (2011). Global cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin, 61, 69-90. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.20107
  11. Lai CH, Hsueh S, Hong JH, et al (1999). Are adenocarcinomas and adenosquamous carcinomas different from squamous carcinomas in stage IB and II cervical cancer patients undergoing primary radical surgery? Int J Gynecol Cancer, 9, 28-36. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1525-1438.1999.09895.x
  12. Lai JC, Chou YJ, Huang N, et al (2013). Survival analysis of Stage IIA1 and IIA2 cervical cancer patients. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol, 52, 33-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tjog.2013.01.006
  13. Landoni F, Maneo A, Colombo A, et al (1997). Randomised study of radical surgery versus radiotherapy for stage Ib-IIa cervical cancer. Lancet, 350, 535-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(97)02250-2
  14. Landoni F, Zanagnolo V, Lovato-Diaz L, et al (2007). Ovarian metastases in early-stage cervical cancer (IA2-IIA): a multicenter retrospective study of 1965 patients (a Cooperative Task Force study). Int J Gynecol Cancer, 17, 623-8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1525-1438.2006.00854.x
  15. Mabuchi S, Okazawa M, Matsuo K, et al (2012). Impact of histological subtype on survival of patients with surgicallytreated stage IA2-IIB cervical cancer: adenocarcinoma versus squamous cell carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol, 127, 114-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2012.06.021
  16. Macdonald OK, Chen J, Dodson M, et al (2009). Prognostic significance of histology and positive lymph node involvement following radical hysterectomy in carcinoma of the cervix. Am J Clin Oncol, 32, 411-6. https://doi.org/10.1097/COC.0b013e31819142dc
  17. Ngamcherttakul V, Ruengkhachorn I (2012). Ovarian metastasis and other ovarian neoplasms in women with cervical cancer stage IA-IIA. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev, 13, 4525-9. https://doi.org/10.7314/APJCP.2012.13.9.4525
  18. Pecorelli S, Zigliani L, Odicino F (2009). Revised FIGO staging for carcinoma of the cervix. Int J Gynaecol Obstet, 105, 107-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijgo.2009.02.009
  19. Perez CA, Grigsby PW, Chao KS, et al (1998). Tumor size, irradiation dose, and long-term outcome of carcinoma of uterine cervix. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 41, 307-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0360-3016(98)00067-4
  20. Peters WA, III, Liu PY, Barrett RJ, et al (2000). Concurrent chemotherapy and pelvic radiation therapy compared with pelvic radiation therapy alone as adjuvant therapy after radical surgery in high-risk early-stage cancer of the cervix. J Clin Oncol, 18, 1606-13.
  21. Quinn MA, Benedet JL, Odicino F, et al (2006). Carcinoma of the cervix uteri. FIGO 26th Annual Report on the Results of Treatment in Gynecological Cancer. Int J Gynaecol Obstet, 95, 43-103. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0020-7292(06)60030-1
  22. Sakuragi N (2007). Up-to-date management of lymph node metastasis and the role of tailored lymphadenectomy in cervical cancer. Int J Clin Oncol, 12, 165-75. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10147-007-0661-2
  23. Shimada M, Kigawa J, Nishimura R, et al (2006). Ovarian metastasis in carcinoma of the uterine cervix. Gynecol Oncol, 101, 234-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2005.10.004
  24. Soisson AP, Soper JT, Clarke-Pearson DL, et al (1990). Adjuvant radiotherapy following radical hysterectomy for patients with stage IB and IIA cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol, 37, 390-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/0090-8258(90)90374-T
  25. Steed H, Capstick V, Schepansky A, et al (2006). Early cervical cancer and parametrial involvement: is it significant? Gynecol Oncol, 103, 53-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2006.01.027
  26. Sutton GP, Bundy BN, Delgado G, et al (1992). Ovarian metastases in stage IB carcinoma of the cervix: a Gynecologic Oncology Group study. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 166, 50-3. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9378(92)91828-X
  27. Takeda N, Sakuragi N, Takeda M, et al (2002). Multivariate analysis of histopathologic prognostic factors for invasive cervical cancer treated with radical hysterectomy and systematic retroperitoneal lymphadenectomy. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand, 81, 1144-51. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0412.2002.811208.x
  28. Trattner M, Graf AH, Lax S, et al (2001). Prognostic factors in surgically treated stage ib-iib cervical carcinomas with special emphasis on the importance of tumor volume. Gynecol Oncol, 82, 11-6. https://doi.org/10.1006/gyno.2001.6252
  29. Verleye L, Vergote I, Reed N, et al (2009). Quality assurance for radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer: the view of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer--Gynecological Cancer Group (EORTC-GCG). Ann Oncol, 20, 1631-8. https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdp196

피인용 문헌

  1. Prognostic Evaluation of Tumor-Stroma Ratio in Patients with Early Stage Cervical Adenocarcinoma Treated by Surgery vol.16, pp.10, 2015, https://doi.org/10.7314/APJCP.2015.16.10.4363
  2. A Single-Institution Radical Surgery Results in Stage IB2/IIA2 (Bulky) Cervical Cancer vol.26, pp.8, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1097/IGC.0000000000000786
  3. Can pelvic lymphadenectomy be omitted in patients with stage IA2, IB1, and IIA1 squamous cell cervical cancer? vol.5, pp.1, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1186/s40064-016-2927-5
  4. Prognostic significance of solitary lymph node metastasis in patients with stages IA2 to IIA cervical carcinoma vol.46, pp.10, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1177/0300060518785827