Intravaginal Brachytherapy in FIGO Stage I Low-Risk Endometrial Cancer

Medical therapy of endometrial cancer: current status and promising novel treatments

While early-stage endometrial cancer is often successfully treated with surgical intervention, treatment of advanced endometrial carcinoma can be difficult and prognosis poor, particularly in the context of metastatic or recurrent disease. Standard chemotherapy agents for both adjuvant first-line treatment (for selected patients deemed at high risk of relapse) and recurrent endometrial cancer include doxorubicin, platinum agents and paclitaxel. Investigational options currently being studied in phase II trials include both combined regimens of standard chemotherapeutic agents versus radiation as well as targeted treatments such as epothilones, mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitors and anti-angiogenic agents. Recent interest in the molecular pathways of carcinogenesis have lead to increased investigation of these novel agents and the hope that they will impact positively on the overall survival of women with endometrial cancer.

Adjuvant radiotherapy for stage I endometrial cancer

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of the original Cochrane review published in Issue 2, 2007. The role of radiotherapy (both pelvic external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) and vaginal intracavity brachytherapy (VBT)) in stage I endometrial cancer following hysterectomy remains controversial.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy of adjuvant radiotherapy following surgery for stage I endometrial cancer.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Specialised Register to end-2005 for the original review, and extended the search to January 2012 for the update.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared post-operative adjuvant radiotherapy (either EBRTor VBT, or both) versus no radiotherapy or VBT in women with stage I endometrial cancer.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials and extracted data to a specifically designed data collection form. The primary outcome was overall survival. Secondary outcomes were endometrial cancer-related deaths, locoregional recurrence and distant recurrence. Meta-analyses were performed using Cochrane Review Manager Software 5.1.

MAIN RESULTS

We included eight trials. Seven trials (3628 women) compared EBRT with no EBRT (or VBT), and one trial (645 women) compared VBTwith no additional treatment. We considered six of the eight trials to be of a high quality. Time-to-event data were not available for all trials and all outcomes.EBRT (with or without VBT) compared with no EBRT (or VBT alone) for stage I endometrial carcinoma significantly reduced locoregional recurrence (time-to-event data: five trials, 2965 women; Hazard Ratio (HR) 0.36, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.25 to 0.52; and dichotomous data: seven trials, 3628 women; Risk Ratio (RR) 0.33, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.47). This reduced risk of locoregional recurrence did not translate into improved overall survival (time-to-event data: five trials, 2,965 women; HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.82 to1.20; and dichotomous data: seven trials, 3628 women; RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.15) or improved endometrial cancer-related survival (time-to-event data: five trials, 2965 women; HR 0.96, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.28; and dichotomous data: seven trials, 3628 women; RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.29) or improved distant recurrence rates (dichotomous data: seven trials, 3628 women; RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.35).EBRT did not improve survival outcomes in either the intermediate-risk or high-risk subgroups, although high-risk data were limited, and a benefit of EBRT for high-risk women could not be excluded. One trial (PORTEC-2) compared EBRT with VBT in the high-intermediate risk group and reported that VBT was effective in ensuring vaginal control with a non-significant difference in loco-regional relapse rate compared to EBRT (5.1% versus 2.1%; HR 2.08, 95% CI 0.71 to 6.09; P = 0.17). In the subgroup of low-risk patients (IA/B and grade 1/2), EBRT increased the risk of endometrial carcinoma-related deaths (including treatment-related deaths) (two trials, 517 women; RR 2.64, 95% CI 1.05 to 6.66) but there was a lack of data on overall survival. We considered the evidence for the low-risk subgroup to be of a low quality.EBRT was associated with significantly increased severe acute toxicity (two trials, 1328 patients, RR 4.68, 95% CI 1.35 to 16.16), increased severe late toxicity (six trials, 3501 women; RR 2.58, 95% CI 1.61 to 4.11) and significant reductions in quality of life scores and rectal and bladder function more than 10 years after randomisation (one trial, 351 women) compared with no EBRT.One trial of VBT versus no additional treatment in women with low-risk lesions reported a non-significant reduction in locoregional recurrence in the VBT group compared with the no additional treatment group (RR 0.39, (95% CI 0.14 to 1.09). There were no significant differences in survival outcomes in this trial.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

EBRT reduces the risk of locoregional recurrence but has no significant impact on cancer-related deaths or overall survival. It is associated with significant morbidity and a reduction in quality of life. There is no demonstrable survival advantage from adjuvant EBRT for high-risk stage I endometrial cancer, however, the meta-analyses of this subgroup were underpowered and also included high-intermediate risk women, therefore we cannot exclude a small benefit in the high-risk subgroup. EBRT may have an adverse effect on endometrial cancer survival when used to treat uncomplicated low-risk (IA/B grade 1/2) endometrial cancer. For the intermediate to high-intermediate risk group, VBT alone appears to be adequate in ensuring vaginal control compared to EBRT. Further research is needed to guide practice for lesions that are truly high risk. In addition, the definitions of risk should be standardised.

Contemporary management of endometrial cancer

The treatment of endometrial cancer has changed substantially in the past decade with the introduction of a new staging system and surgical approaches accompanied by novel adjuvant therapies. Primary surgical treatment is the mainstay of therapy but the effectiveness and extent of lymphadenectomy has been challenged, and its acceptance as a routine procedure varies by country. The role of radiation has evolved and chemotherapy has been incorporated, either alone or combined with radiation, to treat the many patients in whom cancer recurs because of a tumour outside the originally radiated pelvic and lower abdominal area. Use of traditional adjuvant chemotherapeutics has been challenged in clinical trials of new agents with improved side-effect profiles. Novel agents and targeted therapies are being investigated. Research into genetic susceptibility to endometrial cancer and the potential genetic aberrations that might translate into therapeutic interventions continues to increase. Substantial global variability in the treatment of endometrial cancer has led to examination of long-accepted norms, which has resulted in rapidly changing standards. International cooperation in clinical trials will hasten progress in treatment of this ubiquitous cancer.

Adjuvant radiotherapy for stage I endometrial cancer

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of the original Cochrane review published in Issue 2, 2007. The role of radiotherapy (both pelvic external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) and vaginal intracavity brachytherapy (VBT)) in stage I endometrial cancer following hysterectomy remains controversial.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy of adjuvant radiotherapy following surgery for stage I endometrial cancer.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Specialised Register to end-2005 for the original review, and extended the search to January 2012 for the update.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared post-operative adjuvant radiotherapy (either EBRT or VBT, or both) versus no radiotherapy or VBT in women with stage I endometrial cancer.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials and extracted data to a specifically designed data collection form. The primary outcome was overall survival. Secondary outcomes were endometrial cancer-related deaths, locoregional recurrence and distant recurrence. Meta-analyses were performed using Cochrane Review Manager Software 5.1.

MAIN RESULTS

We included eight trials. Seven trials (3628 women) compared EBRT with no EBRT (or VBT), and one trial (645 women) compared VBT with no additional treatment. We considered six of the eight trials to be of a high quality. Time-to-event data were not available for all trials and all outcomes.EBRT (with or without VBT) compared with no EBRT (or VBT alone) for stage I endometrial carcinoma significantly reduced locoregional recurrence (time-to-event data: five trials, 2965 women; Hazard Ratio (HR) 0.36, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.25 to 0.52; and dichotomous data: seven trials, 3628 women; Risk Ratio (RR) 0.33, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.47). This reduced risk of locoregional recurrence did not translate into improved overall survival (time-to-event data: five trials, 2,965 women; HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.20; and dichotomous data: seven trials, 3628 women; RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.15) or improved endometrial cancer-related survival (time-to-event data: five trials, 2965 women; HR 0.96, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.28; and dichotomous data: seven trials, 3628 women; RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.29) or improved distant recurrence rates (dichotomous data: seven trials, 3628 women; RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.80 to1.35).EBRT did not improve survival outcomes in either the intermediate-risk or high-risk subgroups, although high-risk data were limited, and a benefit of EBRT for high-risk women could not be excluded. In the subgroup of low-risk patients (IA/B and grade 1/2), EBRT increased the risk of endometrial carcinoma-related deaths (including treatment-related deaths) (two trials, 517 women; RR 2.64, 95% CI 1.05 to 6.66) but there was a lack of data on overall survival. We considered the evidence for the low-risk subgroup to be of a low quality.EBRT was associated with significantly increased severe acute toxicity (two trials, 1328 patients, RR 4.68, 95% CI 1.35 to 16.16), increased severe late toxicity (six trials, 3501 women; RR 2.58, 95% CI 1.61 to 4.11) and significant reductions in quality of life scores and rectal and bladder function more than 10 years after randomisation (one trial, 351 women) compared with no EBRT.One trial of VBT versus no additional treatment in women with low-risk lesions reported a non-significant reduction in locoregional recurrence in the VBT group compared with the no additional treatment group (RR 0.39, (95% CI 0.14 to 1.09). There were no significant differences in survival outcomes in this trial.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

EBRT reduces the risk of locoregional recurrence but has no significant impact on cancer-related deaths or overall survival. It is associated with significant morbidity and a reduction in quality of life, and bladder and rectal function. EBRT may have an adverse effect on endometrial cancer survival when used to treat uncomplicated low-risk (IA/B grade 1/2) endometrial cancer. There is no demonstrable survival advantage from adjuvant EBRT for high-risk stage I endometrial cancer, however, the meta-analyses of this subgroup were underpowered and also included high-intermediate risk women. Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimates of effects and may change the estimates. Therefore, whilst there appears to be no survival benefit in the routine use of EBRT in women with stage I endometrial cancer, we cannot exclude a benefit in high-risk women. VBT is potentially useful in intermediate-risk and high-risk subgroups but evidence from further RCTs is needed. In addition, the definitions of risk should be standardised.

Controversies in the management of endometrial carcinoma: an update

Endometrial carcinoma is the commonest type of female genital tract malignancy in the developed countries. Endometrial carcinoma is usually confined to the uterus at the time of diagnosis and as such usually carries an excellent prognosis with high curability. Our understanding and management of endometrial cancer have continuously developed. Current controversies focus on screening and early detection, the extent of nodal surgery, and the changing roles of radiation therapy and chemotherapy and will be discussed in this paper.

Image guided, adaptive, accelerated, high dose brachytherapy as model for advanced small volume radiotherapy

Brachytherapy has consistently provided a very conformal radiation therapy modality. Over the last two decades this has been associated with significant improvements in imaging for brachytherapy applications (prostate, gynecology), resulting in many positive advances in treatment planning, application techniques and clinical outcome. This is emphasized by the increased use of brachytherapy in Europe with gynecology as continuous basis and prostate and breast as more recently growing fields. Image guidance enables exact knowledge of the applicator together with improved visualization of tumor and target volumes as well as of organs at risk providing the basis for very individualized 3D and 4D treatment planning. In this commentary the most important recent developments in prostate, gynecological and breast brachytherapy are reviewed, with a focus on European recent and current research aiming at the definition of areas for important future research. Moreover the positive impact of GEC-ESTRO recommendations and the highlights of brachytherapy physics are discussed what altogether presents a full overview of modern image guided brachytherapy. An overview is finally provided on past and current international brachytherapy publications focusing on "Radiotherapy and Oncology". These data show tremendous increase in almost all research areas over the last three decades strongly influenced recently by translational research in regard to imaging and technology. In order to provide high level clinical evidence for future brachytherapy practice the strong need for comprehensive prospective clinical research addressing brachytherapy issues is high-lighted.

External pelvic and vaginal irradiation versus vaginal irradiation alone as postoperative therapy in medium-risk endometrial carcinoma--a prospective randomized study

PURPOSE

To evaluate the value of adjuvant external beam pelvic radiotherapy as adjunct to vaginal brachytherapy (VBT) in medium-risk endometrial carcinoma, with regard to locoregional tumor control, recurrences, survival, and toxicity.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Consecutive series of 527 evaluable patients were included in this randomized trial. Median follow-up for patients alive was 62 months. The primary study endpoints were locoregional recurrences and overall survival. Secondary endpoints were recurrence-free survival, recurrence-free interval, cancer-specific survival, and toxicity.

RESULTS

Five-year locoregional relapse rates were 1.5% after external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) plus VBT and 5% after vaginal irradiation alone (p = 0.013), and 5-year overall survival rates were 89% and 90%, respectively (p = 0.548). Endometrial cancer-related death rates were 3.8% after EBRT plus VBT and 6.8% after VBT (p = 0.118). Pelvic recurrences (exclusively vaginal recurrence) were reduced by 93% by the addition of EBRT to VBT. Deep myometrial infiltration was a significant prognostic factor in this medium-risk group of endometrioid carcinomas but not International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics grade or DNA ploidy. Combined radiotherapy was well tolerated, with serious (Grade 3) late side effects of less than 2%. However, there was a significant difference in favor of VBT alone.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite a significant locoregional control benefit with combined radiotherapy, no survival improvement was recorded, but increased late toxicity was noted in the intestine, bladder, and vagina. Combined RT should probably be reserved for high-risk cases with two or more high-risk factors. VBT alone should be the adjuvant treatment option for purely medium-risk cases.

[High dose rate vaginal brachytherapy in endometrial cancer after surgery]

PURPOSE

This study aimed at analyzing the evolution and type of recurrence in patients treated for stage I endometrial carcinomas, in order to define the respective roles of adjuvant radiotherapy and brachytherapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This monocentric retrospective study was conducted at Centre Alexis-Vautrin, Nancy, France, between January 1995 and December 2000 on all the patients surgically treated for an endometrial cancer, and then treated with high dose rate vaginal brachytherapy. The brachytherapy was delivered in two or three fractions of 7 Gy at 5 mm from the applicator.

RESULTS

In the good prognosis group, the specific and overall survivals at 5 years were respectively 96.5 and 94.2% with no local recurrence demonstrated. In the intermediate prognostic group, the specific and overall survivals at 5 years were respectively 88 and 85%, with six locoregional recurrences observed among those who did not undergo lymphadenectomy; the overall survival at 5 years was significantly decreased in the absence of external radiation. In the group of poor prognosis (stages II and III), the specific survival at 5 years was respectively 72.8 and 67 %, and the overall survival at 5 years 66.7 and 56.4%.

CONCLUSION

Results for local control and survival as well as for tolerance were good. So we have decided to deliver high rate brachytherapy for all intermediate or poor prognosis patients and we have abandoned pelvic radiotherapy for good prognosis tumours (stages IA: no myometrium invasion with grade 3 and >50% of myometrium invasion with grades 1 and 2), whatever the lymph nodes surgery they had. We now propose pelvic radiotherapy only for intermediate prognosis tumours (such as IA>50% of myometrium invasion with grade 3 and IB stages), if patients did not have any lymphatic surgery, or for bad prognosis tumours.

Evidence-based review of the utility of radiation therapy in the treatment of endometrial cancer

Endometrial cancer is the most common cancer of the female genital tract in the USA and usually presents at an early stage. Most women are cured with surgery, however, some patients may require adjuvant therapy including radiation and/or chemotherapy. Risk factors determine the need for adjuvant treatment and, based on these risk factors, patients are categorized as being at low, intermediate or high risk for recurrence. In this article we will review the best level of evidence available for the use of radiation therapy within each risk stratum. The most controversy and debate is associated with patients stratified to the intermediate-risk group.

[Endometrial cancer]

Endometrial cancers are frequent and affect mainly postmenopausal women. They are mostly diagnosed at an early stage with an excellent prognosis. Surgery is the reference for a precise FIGO staging who guide adjuvant treatment. Tumor extension, grade, myometrium invasion and involved lymph nodes will be discriminating in therapeutic strategy. The management of stages I and II has been recently amended by ESMO, who proposed surveillance, brachytherapy, and radiation therapy followed by brachytherapy for respectively low, intermediate and high risk groups. These recommendations are controversial and must be confirmed. Locally advanced stages represent a heterogeneous population in which surgery should be proposed if it is feasible then followed by radiotherapy and/or chemotherapy. Based on an illustrated clinical case, indications, delineation, dosimetry and complications expected with radiotherapy are demonstrated.

Controversies in the management of endometrial carcinoma

Endometrial carcinoma is the most common type of female genital tract malignancy. Although endometrial carcinoma is a low grade curable malignancy, the condition of the disease can range from excellent prognosis with high curability to aggressive disease with poor outcome. During the last 10 years many researches have provided some new valuable data of optimal treatments for endometrial carcinoma. Progression in diagnostic imaging, radiation delivery systems, and systemic therapies potentially can improve outcomes while minimizing morbidity. Firstly, total hysterectomy and bilateral salphingo-oophorectomy is the primary operative procedure. Pelvic lymhadenectomy is performed in most centers on therapeutic and prognostic grounds and to individualize adjuvant treatment. Women with endometrial carcinoma can be readily segregated intraoperatively into “low-risk” and “high-risk” groups to better identify those women who will most likely benefit from thorough lymphadenectomy. Secondly, adjuvant therapies have been proposed for women with endometrial carcinoma postoperatively. Postoperative irradiation is used to reduce pelvic and vaginal recurrences in high risk cases. Chemotherapy is emerging as an important treatment modality in advanced endometrial carcinoma. Meanwhile the availability of new hormonal and biological agents presents new opportunities for therapy.