Radiation Oncology Journal

The Korean Society for Radiation Oncology (대한방사선종양학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Prognostic analysis of uterine cervical cancer treated with postoperative radiotherapy: importance of positive or close parametrial resection margin

  • Kim, Yi-Jun (Department of Radiation Oncology, Ewha Womans University Mokdong Hospital, Ewha Womans University School of Medicine) ;
  • Lee, Kyung-Ja (Department of Radiation Oncology, Ewha Womans University Mokdong Hospital, Ewha Womans University School of Medicine) ;
  • Park, Kyung Ran (Department of Radiation Oncology, Ewha Womans University Mokdong Hospital, Ewha Womans University School of Medicine) ;
  • Kim, Jiyoung (Department of Radiation Oncology, Ewha Womans University Mokdong Hospital, Ewha Womans University School of Medicine) ;
  • Jung, Wonguen (Department of Radiation Oncology, Ewha Womans University Mokdong Hospital, Ewha Womans University School of Medicine) ;
  • Lee, Rena (Department of Radiation Oncology, Ewha Womans University Mokdong Hospital, Ewha Womans University School of Medicine) ;
  • Kim, Seung Cheol (Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ewha Womans University Mokdong Hospital, Ewha Womans University School of Medicine) ;
  • Moon, Hye Sung (Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ewha Womans University Mokdong Hospital, Ewha Womans University School of Medicine) ;
  • Ju, Woong (Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ewha Womans University Mokdong Hospital, Ewha Womans University School of Medicine) ;
  • Kim, Yun Hwan (Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ewha Womans University Mokdong Hospital, Ewha Womans University School of Medicine) ;
  • Lee, Jihae (Department of Radiation Oncology, Ewha Womans University Mokdong Hospital, Ewha Womans University School of Medicine)
  • Received : 2015.04.06
  • Accepted : 2015.06.01
  • Published : 2015.06.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: To analyze prognostic factors for locoregional recurrence (LRR), distant metastasis (DM), and overall survival (OS) in cervical cancer patients who underwent radical hysterectomy followed by postoperative radiotherapy (PORT) in a single institute. Materials and Methods: Clinicopathologic data of 135 patients with clinical stage IA2 to IIA2 cervical cancer treated with PORT from 2001 to 2012 were reviewed, retrospectively. Postoperative parametrial resection margin (PRM) and vaginal resection margin (VRM) were investigated separately. The median treatment dosage of external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) to the whole pelvis was 50.4 Gy in 1.8 Gy/fraction. High-dose-rate vaginal brachytherapy after EBRT was given to patients with positive or close VRMs. Concurrent platinum-based chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) was administered to 73 patients with positive resection margin, lymph node (LN) metastasis, or direct extension of parametrium. Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test were used for analyzing LRR, DM, and OS; Cox regression was applied to analyze prognostic factors. Results: The 5-year disease-free survival was 79% and 5-year OS was 91%. In univariate analysis, positive or close PRM, LN metastasis, direct extension of parametrium, lymphovascular invasion, histology of adenocarcinoma, and chemotherapy were related with more DM and poor OS. In multivariate analysis, PRM and LN metastasis remained independent prognostic factors for OS. Conclusion: PORT after radical hysterectomy in uterine cervical cancer showed excellent OS in this study. Positive or close PRM after radical hysterectomy in uterine cervical cancer correlates with poor prognosis even with CCRT. Therefore, additional treatments to improve local control such as radiation boosting need to be considered.

Keywords

References

  1. Waggoner SE. Cervical cancer. Lancet 2003;361:2217-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(03)13778-6
  2. Rotman M, Sedlis A, Piedmonte MR, et al. A phase III randomized trial of postoperative pelvic irradiation in Stage IB cervical carcinoma with poor prognostic features: follow-up of a gynecologic oncology group study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2006;65:169-76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2005.10.019
  3. Peters WA 3rd, Liu PY, Barrett RJ 2nd, et al. 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 2000;18:1606-13. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2000.18.8.1606
  4. Rose PG. Chemoradiotherapy for cervical cancer. Eur J Cancer 2002;38:270-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-8049(01)00352-5
  5. National Comprehensive Cancer Network. NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) [Internet]. Fort Washington, PA: National Comprehensive Cancer Network; c2015 [cited 2015 Jun 1]. http://www.nccn.org/professionals/ physician_gls/f_guidelines.asp.
  6. Delgado G, Bundy B, Zaino R, Sevin BU, Creasman WT, Major F. Prospective surgical-pathological study of disease-free interval in patients with stage IB squamous cell carcinoma of the cervix: a Gynecologic Oncology Group study. Gynecol Oncol 1990;38:352-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/0090-8258(90)90072-S
  7. Morley GW, Seski JC. Radical pelvic surgery versus radiation therapy for stage I carcinoma of the cervix (exclusive of microinvasion). Am J Obstet Gynecol 1976;126:785-98. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9378(76)90668-2
  8. Hopkins MP, Morley GW. Radical hysterectomy versus radiation therapy for stage IB squamous cell cancer of the cervix. Cancer 1991;68:272-7. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0142(19910715)68:2<272::AID-CNCR2820680210>3.0.CO;2-X
  9. Fuller AF Jr, Elliott N, Kosloff C, Hoskins WJ, Lewis JL Jr. Determinants of increased risk for recurrence in patients undergoing radical hysterectomy for stage IB and IIA carcinoma of the cervix. Gynecol Oncol 1989;33:34-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/0090-8258(89)90598-2
  10. Inoue T, Okumura M. Prognostic significance of parametrial extension in patients with cervical carcinoma Stages IB, IIA, and IIB: a study of 628 cases treated by radical hysterectomy and lymphadenectomy with or without postoperative irradiation. Cancer 1984;54:1714-9. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0142(19841015)54:8<1714::AID-CNCR2820540838>3.0.CO;2-S
  11. Zreik TG, Chambers JT, Chambers SK. Parametrial involvement, regardless of nodal status: a poor prognostic factor for cervical cancer. Obstet Gynecol 1996;87(5 Pt 1):741-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/0029-7844(96)00026-9
  12. Averette HE, Nguyen HN, Donato DM, et al. Radical hysterectomy for invasive cervical cancer: a 25-year prospective experience with the Miami technique. Cancer 1993;71(4 Suppl):1422-37. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.2820710407
  13. Estape RE, Angioli R, Madrigal M, et al. Close vaginal margins as a prognostic factor after radical hysterectomy. Gynecol Oncol 1998;68:229-32. https://doi.org/10.1006/gyno.1998.4960
  14. Sevin BU, Lu Y, Bloch DA, Nadji M, Koechli OR, Averette HE. Surgically defined prognostic parameters in patients with early cervical carcinoma: a multivariate survival tree analysis. Cancer 1996;78:1438-46. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(19961001)78:7<1438::AID-CNCR10>3.0.CO;2-0
  15. Trattner M, Graf AH, Lax S, et al. Prognostic factors in surgically treated stage IB-IIB cervical carcinomas with special emphasis on the importance of tumor volume. Gynecol Oncol 2001;82:11-6. https://doi.org/10.1006/gyno.2001.6252
  16. Tsai CS, Lai CH, Wang CC, et al. The prognostic factors for patients with early cervical cancer treated by radical hysterectomy and postoperative radiotherapy. Gynecol Oncol 1999;75:328-33. https://doi.org/10.1006/gyno.1999.5527
  17. Ho CM, Chien TY, Huang SH, Wu CJ, Shih BY, Chang SC. Multivariate analysis of the prognostic factors and outcomes in early cervical cancer patients undergoing radical hysterectomy. Gynecol Oncol 2004;93:458-64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2004.01.026
  18. Lai CH, Hong JH, Hsueh S, et al. Preoperative prognostic variables and the impact of postoperative adjuvant therapy on the outcomes of stage IB or II cervical carcinoma patients with or without pelvic lymph node metastases: an analysis of 891 cases. Cancer 1999;85:1537-46. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(19990401)85:7<1537::AID-CNCR15>3.0.CO;2-6
  19. Landoni F, Maneo A, Colombo A, et al. Randomised study of radical surgery versus radiotherapy for stage IB-IIA cervical cancer. Lancet 1997;350:535-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(97)02250-2
  20. Perez CA, Camel HM, Kuske RR, et al. Radiation therapy alone in the treatment of carcinoma of the uterine cervix: a 20-year experience. Gynecol Oncol 1986;23:127-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/0090-8258(86)90216-7
  21. Nowell PC. The clonal evolution of tumor cell populations. Science 1976;194:23-8. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.959840
  22. Sedlis A, Bundy BN, Rotman MZ, Lentz SS, Muderspach LI, Zaino RJ. A randomized trial of pelvic radiation therapy versus no further therapy in selected patients with stage IB carcinoma of the cervix after radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy: a Gynecologic Oncology Group Study. Gynecol Oncol 1999;73:177-83. https://doi.org/10.1006/gyno.1999.5387

Cited by

  1. Concurrent paclitaxel/cisplatin chemoradiotherapy with or without consolidation chemotherapy in high-risk early-stage cervical cancer patients following radical hysterectomy: preliminary results of a vol.7, pp.43, 2015, https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.10450
  2. Long-term results of early adjuvant concurrent chemoradiotherapy for high-risk, early stage uterine cervical cancer patients after radical hysterectomy vol.17, pp.None, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-017-3299-0
  3. Clinical impact of boost irradiation to pelvic lymph node in uterine cervical cancer treated with definitive chemoradiotherapy vol.97, pp.16, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1097/md.0000000000010517
  4. Cervical squamous cell carcinoma-secreted exosomal miR-221-3p promotes lymphangiogenesis and lymphatic metastasis by targeting VASH1 vol.38, pp.8, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41388-018-0511-x
  5. Significance of the number of high-risk factors in patients with cervical cancer treated with radical hysterectomy and concurrent chemoradiotherapy vol.157, pp.2, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2020.02.031
  6. Exosomal microRNAs: novel players in cervical cancer vol.12, pp.18, 2015, https://doi.org/10.2217/epi-2020-0026
  7. CNN3 acts as a potential oncogene in cervical cancer by affecting RPLP1 mRNA expression vol.10, pp.None, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-58947-y
  8. Enhanced Efficacy of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy with Nab-Paclitaxel and Platinum for Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer vol.13, pp.None, 2015, https://doi.org/10.2147/cmar.s343602