Pattern of failure and value of follow-up procedures in endometrial and cervical cancer patients

Follow-up protocols for women with cervical cancer after primary treatment

BACKGROUND

Cervical cancer is the second most common cancer among women up to 65 years of age and is the most frequent cause of death from gynaecological cancers worldwide. Although surveillance of women after completion of primary treatment for cervical cancer is purported to have an impact on their overall survival (OS), no strictly defined follow-up protocols are available for these women. Wide diversity in management has been noted in the follow-up of women who have completed primary treatment for cervical cancer. Traditionally, women treated for cervical cancer undergo routine long-term, even life-long, follow-up. The primary objective of this practice has been to detect and treat recurrence early. This review sets out to systematically evaluate available evidence for the role of different models of follow-up after cervical cancer and the optimal use of investigations.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits, harms and costs of different follow-up protocols for women who have completed primary treatment for cervical cancer.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2013, Issue 1), the Cochrane Gynaecological Cancer Group (CGCG) Trials Register, MEDLINE and EMBASE up to January 2013. We also searched registers of clinical trials, abstracts of scientific meetings and reference lists of clinical guidelines and review articles and contacted experts in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared different follow-up protocols after primary treatment in women with cervical cancer.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed whether potentially relevant studies met the inclusion criteria. No trials were found, and therefore no data were analysed.

MAIN RESULTS

The search strategy identified 1,377 unique references, of which all were excluded on the basis of title and abstract.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found no evidence to inform decisions about different follow-up protocols after primary treatment for women with cervical cancer. Ideally, a large RCT or, at the very least, well-designed non-randomised studies (NRSs) that use multi-variate analysis to adjust for baseline imbalances are needed to compare these follow-up protocols. Such studies could include prospective trials conducted to determine the benefits and harms of different follow-up protocols upon completion of primary treatment for cervical cancer, along with an RCT undertaken to compare predefined follow-up protocols versus participant-initiated follow-up versus no follow-up until a participant is referred to a gynaecological oncology service after signs or symptoms of recurrence have been identified in the primary care or community setting.

Definition of compartment-based radical surgery in uterine cancer: modified radical hysterectomy in intermediate/high-risk endometrial cancer using peritoneal mesometrial resection (PMMR) by M Höckel translated to robotic surgery

BACKGROUND

The technique of compartment-based radical hysterectomy was originally described by M Höckel as total mesometrial resection (TMMR) for standard treatment of stage I and II cervical cancer. However, with regard to the ontogenetically-defined compartments of tumor development (Müllerian) and lymph drainage (Müllerian and mesonephric), compartments at risk may also be defined consistently in endometrial cancer. This is the first report in the literature on the compartment-based surgical approach to endometrial cancer. Peritoneal mesometrial resection (PMMR) with therapeutic lymphadenectomy (tLNE) as an ontogenetic, compartment-based oncologic surgery could be beneficial for patients in terms of surgical radicalness as well as complication rates; it can be standardized for compartment-confined tumors. Supported by M Höckel, PMMR was translated to robotic surgery (rPMMR) and described step-by-step in comparison to robotic TMMR (rTMMR).

METHODS

Patients (n = 42) were treated by rPMMR (n = 39) or extrafascial simple hysterectomy (n = 3) with/without bilateral pelvic and/or periaortic robotic therapeutic lymphadenectomy (rtLNE) for stage I to III endometrial cancer, according to International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) classification. Tumors were classified as intermediate/high-risk in 22 out of 40 patients (55%) and low-risk in 18 out of 40 patients (45%), and two patients showed other uterine malignancies. In 11 patients, no adjuvant external radiotherapy was performed, but chemotherapy was applied.

RESULTS

No transition to open surgery was necessary. There were no intraoperative complications. The postoperative complication rate was 12% with venous thromboses, (n = 2), infected pelvic lymph cyst (n = 1), transient aphasia (n = 1) and transient dysfunction of micturition (n = 1). The mean difference in perioperative hemoglobin concentrations was 2.4 g/dL (± 1.2 g/dL) and one patient (2.4%) required transfusion. During follow-up (median 17 months), one patient experienced distant recurrence and one patient distant/regional recurrence of endometrial cancer (4.8%), but none developed isolated locoregional recurrence. There were two deaths from endometrial cancer during the observation period (4.8%).

CONCLUSIONS

We conclude that rPMMR and rtLNE are feasible and safe with regard to perioperative morbidity, thus, it seems promising for the treatment of intermediate/high-risk endometrial cancer in terms of surgical radicalness and complication rates. This could be particularly beneficial for morbidly obese and seriously ill patients.

Fertility-sparing surgery for early-stage cervical cancer

Nowadays cervical cancer is diagnosed in many women who still want to have children. This led to the need to provide fertility-sparing treatments. The main goal is to maintain reproductive ability without decreasing overall and recurrence-free survival. In this article, we review data on procedures for fertility preservation, namely, vaginal and abdominal trachelectomy, less invasive surgery and neoadjuvant chemotherapy. For each one, oncological and obstetrical outcomes are analyzed. Comparing to traditionally offered radical hysterectomy, the overall oncologic safety is good, with promising obstetrical outcomes.

Survival after stage IA endometrial cancer; can follow-up be altered? A prospective nationwide Danish survey

OBJECTIVE

To present Danish national survival data on women with early stage endometrial cancer and use these data to discuss the relevance of postoperative follow-up.

DESIGN

Prospective study.

SETTING

Danish Endometrial Cancer Study (DEMCA).

POPULATION

Five hundred and seventy-one FIGO stage IA (1988 classification) endometrial cancer patients prospectively included between 1986 and 1999. All patients had total abdominal hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy without adjuvant therapy.

METHODS

The patient and the disease characteristics were drawn from the DEMCA database with cross-references to the national death registry and the national pathology database. Statistical methods included Kaplan-Meier, log-rank and Cox regression analysis.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Survival rates in relation to histopathology.

RESULTS

The five year overall survival rate was 88.9% and five year disease-specific survival was 97.3%. Patients with low- (91.8%) and high-risk histopathology (8.2%) were compared. The age-adjusted overall and disease-specific survival differed significantly between women with low- and high-risk histopathology (p = 0.039 and p = 0.004, respectively). The disease-specific survival adjusted for age between patients with well-differentiated endometrioid tumors differed from those with moderately differentiated tumors (p = 0.008, hazard ratio = 3.75, 95% confidence interval 1.41-10.00). Recurrence data were available on 464 patients. Twenty-three (3.9%) experienced recurrence. Of these recurrences, 15 of 23 (65%) were vaginal. Death from recurrence was observed in nine of 23 (39%) patients, and five of these nine had vaginal recurrences.

CONCLUSIONS

Women with FIGO stage IA endometrial cancer have a very high disease-specific five year survival. Survival was related to histopathology. Follow-up at a highly specialized tertiary care center for patients with an extremely good prognosis may be questioned.

Post-treatment follow-up procedures in cervical cancer patients previously treated with radiotherapy

PURPOSE

We investigated the role of physical examination, CT scan, chest X-ray, and Pap smear in the routine follow-up program for cervical cancer patients previously treated with radiotherapy.

METHODS

The records of women who had developed recurrent cervical cancer after radiotherapy were retrospectively reviewed. The optimal procedure for the detection of recurrence was evaluated according to the disease-free interval (DFI). Survival analysis was performed based on the Kaplan-Meier method and comparisons between groups were made using the log-rank test.

RESULTS

A total of 146 recurrent cervical cancer patients were included in our database. The majority of recurrences were diagnosed either by symptoms, physical examination, or CT scan. The patients whose recurrent disease was detected by Pap smear, physical examination, or CT scan had a significantly longer survival than those detected by symptoms. When analyzed according to DFI, physical examination, and CT scan led to the detection of recurrence in patients with a DFI of 1-5 years. In contrast, chest X-ray and Pap smear only had a clinical impact on the diagnosis of recurrence in patients with a DFI of 1-2 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Chest X-ray and Pap smear can be routinely performed for the first 2 years after radiotherapy, but can be omitted or used sparingly thereafter.

Follow-up for women after treatment for cervical cancer

QUESTION

What is the most appropriate follow-up strategy for patients with cervical cancer who are clinically disease-free after receiving primary treatment?

PERSPECTIVES

For women with cervical cancer who have been treated with curative intent, follow-up includes identification of complications related to treatment and intervention in the event of recurrent disease. Most women who recur with cervical cancer are not curable; however, early identification of recurrence can alter disease management or treatment-planning options, and for those with a central pelvic recurrence and no evidence of distant disease, there is a potential for cure with additional therapy. Follow-up protocols in this population are variable, using a number of tests at a variety of intervals with questionable outcomes.

OUTCOMES

Outcomes of interest included recurrence, survival, and quality of life.

METHODOLOGY

The Gynecology Cancer Disease Site Group (DSG) conducted a systematic review of the literature and a narrative review of emerging clinical issues to inform the most appropriate follow-up strategy for patients with cervical cancer. The evidence was insufficient to specify a clinically useful recommended follow-up schedule, and therefore, the expert consensus opinion of the Gynecology Cancer DSG was used to develop recommendations on patient surveillance. The resulting recommendations were reviewed and approved by the Gynecology Cancer DSG and by the Program in Evidence-Based Care Report Approval Panel. An external review by Ontario practitioners completed the final phase of the review process. Feedback from all parties was incorporated to create the final practice guideline.

RESULTS

The systematic review of the literature identified seventeen retrospective studies. The Gynecology Cancer DSG used a consensus process to develop recommendations based on the available evidence from the systematic review, the narrative review, and the collective clinical experience and judgment of the DSG members.

PRACTICE GUIDELINE

The recommendations in this practice guideline are based on the expert consensus opinion of the Gynecology Cancer DSG, informed by evidence from retrospective studies. These are some general features of an appropriate follow-up strategy: 1. At a minimum, follow-up visits with a complete physical examination, including a pelvic-rectal exam and a patient history, should be conducted by a physician experienced in the surveillance of cancer patients. 2. There is little evidence to suggest that vaginal vault cytology adds significantly to the clinical exam in detecting early disease recurrence. 3. Routine use of various other radiologic or biologic follow-up investigations in asymptomatic patients is not advocated, because the role of those investigations has yet to be evaluated in a definitive manner. 4. A reasonable follow-up schedule involves follow-up visits every 3-4 months in the first 2 years and every 6-12 months in years 3-5. Patients should return to annual population-based general physical and pelvic examinations after 5 years of recurrence-free follow-up.

Posttreatment surveillance and diagnosis of recurrence in women with gynecologic malignancies: Society of Gynecologic Oncologists recommendations

Although gynecologic cancers account for only 10% of all new cancer cases in women, these cancers account for 20% of all female cancer survivors. Improvements in cancer care have resulted in almost 10 million cancer survivors, and this number is expected to grow. Therefore, determining the most cost-effective clinical surveillance for detection of recurrence is critical. Unfortunately, there has been a paucity of research in what are the most cost-effective strategies for surveillance once patients have achieved a complete response. Currently, most recommendations are based on retrospective studies and expert opinion. Taking a thorough history, performing a thorough examination, and educating cancer survivors about concerning symptoms is the most effective method for the detection of most gynecologic cancer recurrences. There is very little evidence that routine cytologic procedures or imaging improves the ability to detect gynecologic cancer recurrence at a stage that will impact cure or response rates to salvage therapy. This article will review the most recent data on surveillance for gynecologic cancer recurrence in women who have had a complete response to primary cancer therapy.

Helical tomotherapy with simultaneous integrated boost after laparoscopic staging in patients with cervical cancer: analysis of feasibility and early toxicity

PURPOSE

To demonstrate the feasibility and safety of the simultaneous integrated boost technique for dose escalation in combination with helical tomotherapy in patients with cervical cancer.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Forty patients (International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics Stage IB1 pN1-IVA) underwent primary chemoradiation with helical tomotherapy. Before therapy, 29/40 patients underwent laparoscopic pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy. In 21%, 31%, and 3% of the patients, pelvic, pelvic and para-aortic, and skip metastases in the para-aortic region could be confirmed. All patients underwent radiation with 1.8-50.4 Gy to the tumor region and the pelvic (para-aortic) lymph node region (planning target volume-A), and a simultaneous boost with 2.12-59.36 Gy to the boost region (planning target volume-B). The boost region was defined using titan clips during laparoscopic staging. In all other patients, standardized borders for the planning target volume-B were defined. High-dose-rate brachytherapy was performed in 39/40 patients. The mean biologic effective dose to the macroscopic tumor ranged from 87.5 to 97.5 Gy. Chemotherapy consisted of weekly cisplatin 40 mg/m(2). Dose-volume histograms and acute gastrointestinal, genitourinary, and hematologic toxicity were evaluated.

RESULTS

The mean treatment time was 45 days. The mean doses to the small bowel, rectum, and bladder were 28.5 ± 6.1 Gy, 47.9 ± 3.8 Gy, and 48 ± 3 Gy, respectively. Hematologic toxicity Grade 3 occurred in 20% of patients, diarrhea Grade 2 in 5%, and diarrhea Grade 3 in 2.5%. There was no Grade 3 genitourinary toxicity. All patients underwent curettage 3 months after chemoradiation, which confirmed complete pathologic response in 38/40 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The concept of simultaneous integrated boost for dose escalation in patients with cervical cancer is feasible, with a low rate of acute gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicity. Whether dose escalation can be translated into improved outcome will be assessed after a longer follow-up time.

Follow-up routines in gynecological cancer - time for a change?

OBJECTIVE

To determine current practice of follow-up of Norwegian gynecological cancer patients, and to review available randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in gynecologic, breast and colorectal cancer patients in order to discuss whether such studies are feasible in gynecological cancer patients.

DESIGN

A combined questionnaire study and a systematic review of RCTs in follow-up of gynecological, breast, and colorectal cancers.

POPULATION

Gynecological, breast, and colorectal cancer patients.

METHODS

A questionnaire regarding follow-up routines was mailed to 31 gynecological departments in Norway. A systematic search on MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library databases was conducted to identify RCTs in follow-up of breast, colorectal, and gynecological cancers.

RESULTS

The questionnaire study showed that the number of controls varied from eight to 16 during the first five years' post-treatment. Routine investigations such as chest X-ray and cytology were frequently used in endometrial and cervical cancer. All departments used CA-125 in follow-up of ovarian cancer patients. Reviewing the literature, 19 RCTs of varying methodological quality were identified for colorectal and breast cancers, and none for gynecologic cancer. Different follow-up models were compared, and most studies concluded that there were no significant differences in the detection of recurrence, overall survival, and quality of life between the studied groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Follow-up routines after gynecological cancer vary in Norway. The optimal approach is unknown and RCTs comparing follow-up protocols are missing. Studies of breast and colorectal cancer patients show that studies on follow-up strategies are feasible but sufficient sample size and observation time are important.

Initial failure site according to primary treatment with or without para-aortic lymphadenectomy in endometrial cancer

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to compare the initial failure sites in patients with endometrial cancer who underwent surgical treatment including pelvic lymphadenectomy with or without para-aortic lymphadenectomy.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was carried out for 657 endometrial cancer patients with no residual disease after initial treatments including lymphadenectomy at two tertiary centers between 1987 and 2004. Surgical treatment at one institute included pelvic lymphadenectomy (PLX) without para-aortic lymphadenectomy (PALX), while surgical treatment including PLX+PALX was routinely performed at the other institute. We identified patients with recurrence and evaluated initial failure sites. Rates of recurrence in the respective sites were compared according to the type of lymphadenectomy.

RESULTS

Of the 657 patients, 103 (15.7%) suffered recurrence. There was no significant difference between the rate of intrapelvic recurrence in the PLX alone group and that in the PLX+PALX group (4.7% vs. 2.9%, p=0.22). The rate of extrapelvic recurrence in the PLX alone group was significantly higher than that in the PLX+PALX group (16.1% vs. 6.2%, p<0.0001), and the rate of para-aortic node (PAN) recurrence in the PLX alone group was also significantly higher than that in the PLX+PALX group (5.1% vs. 0.6%, p=0.0004). In the analysis of patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy, the rate of PAN recurrence in the PLX alone group was significantly higher than that in the PLX+PALX group (9.5% vs. 1.3%, p=0.0036).

CONCLUSION

PAN recurrence was a failure pattern peculiar to the PLX alone group. Adjuvant chemotherapy might not be able to replace surgical removal as a treatment for metastatic lymph nodes.

Prognostic factors for survival in patients with recurrent cervical cancer previously treated with radiotherapy

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to identify the prognostic factors and to establish a model for the prediction of life expectancy in patients with recurrent cervical cancer that had previously been treated with radiotherapy.

METHODS

The records of consecutive women with recurrent cervical cancer after radiotherapy were retrospectively reviewed. Primary disease, follow-up, and recurrence data were collected. Univariate and multivariate analyses of prognostic factors of survival were performed.

RESULTS

A total of 162 patients were included in our database. The median survival after recurrence was 15 months. Multivariate analysis revealed that symptom status, the site of relapse, prior chemoradiotherapy, and treatment modality were significant prognostic factors in terms of survival after recurrence. Patient survival was inversely correlated with the number of these prognostic factors. When the patients were divided into 3 prognostic groups, (low risk: patients with no poor prognostic factors; intermediate: patients with one poor prognostic factor; and high-risk: patients with more than 2 poor prognostic factors), the patients in the high-risk group had a significantly shorter survival (median, 10 months) than those with one risk factor (median, 20 months) or no risk factors (median, 36 months).

CONCLUSIONS

Symptom status, the site of relapse, prior chemoradiotherapy, and treatment modality are significant prognostic factors in patients with recurrent cervical cancer that had previously been treated with radiotherapy. Our prognostic model, composed of 4 clinical variables, may enable physicians to predict survival more accurately.

Helical tomotherapy in cervical cancer patients: simultaneous integrated boost concept: technique and acute toxicity

PURPOSE

To evaluate the acute toxicity of simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) technique for dose escalation with helical tomotherapy (HT) in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

20 patients (FIGO IB1 pN1-IIIB) underwent primary chemoradiation. Prior to chemoradiation, a laparoscopic pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy was performed. A boost region was defined using titanium clips during staging for planning target volume (PTV-B). Patients were treated with five weekly fractions of 1.8 Gy to a total dose of 50.4 Gy to the tumor region and the pelvic (para-aortic) lymph node region (PTV-A), and five weekly fractions of 2.12 Gy to a total dose of 59.36 Gy to the PTV-B. Chemotherapy consisted of weekly cisplatin 40 mg/m(2). 19 patients underwent brachytherapy. Dose-volume histograms were evaluated and acute gastrointestinal (GI), genitourinary (GU), and hematologic toxicity were documented (CTCAE v3.0).

RESULTS

Pelvic and para-aortic lymph node metastases were confirmed in nine and four patients, respectively. Five patients refused laparoscopic staging. The mean volume of PTV-A and PTV-B was 1,570 ± 404 cm(3) and 341 ± 125 cm(3), respectively. The mean dose to the bladder, rectum, and small bowel was 47.85 Gy, 45.76 Gy, and 29.71 Gy, respectively. No grade 4/5 toxicity was observed. Grade 2/3 hematologic toxicity occurred in 50% of patients and 5% experienced grade 3 diarrhea. There was no grade 3 GU toxicity. 19 patients underwent curettage 6-9 weeks after chemoradiation without any evidence of tumor.

CONCLUSION

The concept of SIB for dose escalation in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer is feasible with a low rate of acute toxicity. Whether dose escalation can translate into improved outcome will be assessed after a longer follow-up.