1
|
Hwang DW, Kim SI, Kim HS, Chung HH, Kim JW, Park NH, Lee M. Comparison of survival and complications between minimally invasive and open staging surgeries in non-endometrioid endometrial cancer. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY 2024; 50:108584. [PMID: 39154427 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2024.108584] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/05/2024] [Revised: 07/23/2024] [Accepted: 08/02/2024] [Indexed: 08/20/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE This study aimed to compare survival and complications between minimally invasive surgery and open surgery and evaluate related risk factors in patients with non-endometrioid endometrial cancer. METHODS Clinicopathologic characteristics; survival outcomes; complications; and prognostic factors associated with progression-free survival and overall survival were compared among patients with non-endometrioid endometrial cancer who underwent primary staging surgery using laparoscopic, robotic, or open abdominal surgery (2004-2017). RESULTS In total, 91 patients were included: 41 and 50 underwent minimally invasive surgery and open surgery, respectively. The minimally invasive surgery and open surgery groups showed similar progression-free survival (5-year progression-free survival rate, 58.7 % vs. 58.5 %; P = .925) and overall survival (5-year overall survival rate, 73.6 % vs. 80.3 %; P = .834). Intraoperative (7.2 % vs. 6.0 %; P = .111) and postoperative surgical complications (14.6 % vs. 26.0 %; P = .165) were similar between the groups. However, blood loss was lower (mean, 305.1 vs. 561.2 ml, P < .001) and hospital stay was shorter (mean, 8.2 vs. 15.4 days, P < .001) in the minimally invasive surgery group. Using multivariate analysis, lymphovascular space invasion was identified as poor prognostic factor for progression-free survival (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 3.054; 95 % confidence interval [CI], 1.521-6.132; P = .002) and overall survival (adjusted HR, 3.918; 95 % CI, 1.455-10.551; P = .007), whereas age ≥ 60 years was poor prognostic factor for only overall survival (adjusted HR, 5.0953; 95 % CI, 1.660-15.378; P = .004). CONCLUSIONS Surgical outcomes did not differ between the minimally invasive and open surgery group in patients with non-endometrioid endometrial cancer. Lymphovascular space invasion was a significant survival factor in this context.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dong Won Hwang
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, 03080, Republic of Korea
| | - Se Ik Kim
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, 03080, Republic of Korea; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, 03080, Republic of Korea
| | - Hee Seung Kim
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, 03080, Republic of Korea; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, 03080, Republic of Korea
| | - Hyun Hoon Chung
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, 03080, Republic of Korea; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, 03080, Republic of Korea
| | - Jae-Weon Kim
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, 03080, Republic of Korea; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, 03080, Republic of Korea
| | - Noh Hyun Park
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, 03080, Republic of Korea; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, 03080, Republic of Korea
| | - Maria Lee
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, 03080, Republic of Korea; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, 03080, Republic of Korea.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Dagher C, Lim YH, Sonoda Y, Marshall L, Long Roche K, Jewell E, Chi DS, Gardner G, Broach V, Mueller JJ, Abu-Rustum NR, Leitao MM. Oncologic and Perioperative Outcomes of Robot-Assisted Versus Conventional Laparoscopy for the Treatment of Clinically Uterine-Confined High-Grade Adenocarcinoma. Ann Surg Oncol 2024:10.1245/s10434-024-16029-7. [PMID: 39317893 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-024-16029-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/28/2024] [Accepted: 07/29/2024] [Indexed: 09/26/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to compare oncologic and perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted laparoscopy (RA) and conventional laparoscopy (LSC) in apparent clinically uterine-confined, high-grade adenocarcinoma. METHODS A retrospective review was conducted to identify patients with newly diagnosed high-grade uterine adenocarcinoma treated at our institution between 1 January 2009 and 30 June 2021. Exclusion criteria included bulky extrauterine disease, no lymph node assessment, or synchronous tumors. Clinicopathologic details were obtained from medical records. Postoperative complications were classified using the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center Surgical Secondary Events system, and statistical analysis was performed using appropriate tests. RESULTS Of 901 patients identified, 748 (83%) underwent RA and 153 (17%) underwent LSC. Median age was 65 years (range 25-92) and median body mass index was 30 kg/m2 (range 15-60). Overall, 650 patients (72%) had 2009 International Federation of Obstetrics and Gynecology (FIGO) stage I disease. Forty-one patients (4.6%) converted to laparotomy-26 (3.5%) from RA versus 15 (9.8%) from LSC (p = 0.02). Postoperative complications occurred in 81 patients (9.0%), with no significant differences in type or rate between groups. Median operative time was 192 mins (range 88-936) for RA versus 168 mins (range 90-372) for LSC (p = 0.002). Median follow-up was 52 months (range 1-163) for RA and 66 months (range 7-165) for LSC. Four-year progression-free survival (PFS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) were similar between groups. Multivariate analysis showed stage, histology, peritoneal cytology, and lymphovascular invasion predicated a decrease in PFS and DSS. CONCLUSIONS RA demonstrated comparable oncologic outcomes to LSC in patients with high-grade endometrial carcinoma, with no significant difference in postoperative complications or long-term survival.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christian Dagher
- Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Yu Hui Lim
- Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Yukio Sonoda
- Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA
| | - Lila Marshall
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Rochester, New York, NY, USA
| | - Kara Long Roche
- Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA
| | - Elizabeth Jewell
- Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA
| | - Dennis S Chi
- Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA
| | - Ginger Gardner
- Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA
| | - Vance Broach
- Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA
| | - Jennifer J Mueller
- Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA
| | - Nadeem R Abu-Rustum
- Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA
| | - Mario M Leitao
- Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Zhang Y, Chu R, Zhang Z, Xu C, Liu J, Zhang J, Wang J, Wang Q, Liu C, Feng J, Yao Q, Yao S, Xue F, Guo H, Xia M, Wang X, Zhao W, Li X, Lin B, Zhao X, Ma J, Zhang P, Guo R, Gao Q, Sun C, Ma D, Kong B, Li Y, Chen G, Song K. Prognostic significance of positive peritoneal cytology in endometrial carcinoma based on ESGO/ESTRO/ESP risk classification: A multicenter retrospective study. Gynecol Oncol 2023; 176:43-52. [PMID: 37442025 DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2023.06.578] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/29/2022] [Revised: 06/12/2023] [Accepted: 06/27/2023] [Indexed: 07/15/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE This study aimed to determine the prognostic significance of positive peritoneal cytology (PC) on endometrial carcinoma (EC) patients under the ESGO/ESTRO/ESP risk classification. METHODS This study retrospectively analyzed EC patients from 27 medical centers in China from 2000 to 2019. Patients were divided into three ESGO risk groups: low-risk, intermediate-risk and high-intermediate risk, and high-risk groups. The covariates were balanced by using the propensity score-based inverse probability of treatment weighting (PS-IPTW). The prognostic significance of PC was assessed by Kaplan-Meier curves and multivariate Cox regression analysis. RESULTS A total of 6313 EC patients with PC results were included and positive PC was reported in 384 women (6.1%). The multivariate Cox analysis in all patients showed the positive PC was significantly associated with decreased PFS (hazard ratio [HR] 2.20, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.55-3.13, P < 0.001) and OS (HR 2.25, 95% CI 1.49-3.40, P < 0.001),and the Kaplan-Meier curves also showed a poor survival in the intermediate and high-intermediate risk group (5-year PFS: 75.5% vs. 93.0%, P < 0.001; 5-year OS: 78.3% vs. 96.4%, P < 0.001); While in the low-risk group, there were no significant differences in PFS and OS between different PC status (5-year PFS: 93.1% vs. 97.3%, P = 0.124; 5-year OS: 98.6% vs. 98.2%, P = 0.823); in the high-risk group, significant difference was only found in PFS (5-year PFS: 62.5% vs. 77.9%, P = 0.033). CONCLUSION Positive PC was an adverse prognostic factor for EC, especially in the intermediate and high-intermediate risk patients. Gynecologic oncologists should reconsider the effect of positive PC on different ESGO risk groups.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yue Zhang
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan 250012, China; Division of Gynecology oncology, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan 250012, China
| | - Ran Chu
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan 250012, China; Division of Gynecology oncology, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan 250012, China
| | - Zhaoyang Zhang
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan 250012, China; Division of Gynecology oncology, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan 250012, China
| | - Congjian Xu
- Department of Gynecology, Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital of Fudan University, Shanghai 250023, China
| | - Jihong Liu
- Department of Gynecologic Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou 510060, China
| | - Jieqing Zhang
- Department of Gynecologic Oncology, Guangxi Medical University Cancer Hospital, Nanning 530021, China
| | - Jianliu Wang
- Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing 100044, China
| | - Qiannan Wang
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan 250012, China; Division of Gynecology oncology, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan 250012, China
| | - Chang Liu
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan 250012, China; Division of Gynecology oncology, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan 250012, China
| | - Jie Feng
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan 250012, China; Division of Gynecology oncology, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan 250012, China
| | - Qin Yao
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Qingdao 266003, China
| | - Shuzhong Yao
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510080, China
| | - Fengxia Xue
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Tianjin Medical University General Hospital, Tianjin 300052, China
| | - Hongyan Guo
- The Third Hospital of Peking University, Beijing 100191, China
| | - Min Xia
- Department 0f Gynecology and Obstetrics, The Affiliated Yantai Yuhuangding Hospital of Qindao University, Yantai 264000, China
| | - Xipeng Wang
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, XinHua Hospital, Shanghai JiaoTong University School of Medicine, Shanghai 200092, China
| | - Weidong Zhao
- The First Affiliated Hospital of USTC, Division of Life Sciences and Medicine, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230001, China
| | - Xiaomao Li
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, The Third Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510630, China
| | - Bei Lin
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Shengjing Hospital Affiliated to China Medical University, Shenyang 110004, China
| | - Xia Zhao
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Development and Related Disease of Women and Children Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province, Key Laboratory of Birth Defects and Related Diseases of Women and Children, Ministry of Education, West China Second Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China
| | - Jiezhi Ma
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Xiangya Third Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan 410013, China
| | - Ping Zhang
- Department of Gynecology, The Second Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan 250033, China
| | - Ruixia Guo
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450052, China
| | - Qinglei Gao
- Cancer Biology Research Center (Key Laboratory of the Ministry of Education), Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei 430030, China; Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei 430030, China
| | - Chaoyang Sun
- Cancer Biology Research Center (Key Laboratory of the Ministry of Education), Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei 430030, China; Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei 430030, China
| | - Ding Ma
- Cancer Biology Research Center (Key Laboratory of the Ministry of Education), Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei 430030, China; Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei 430030, China
| | - Beihua Kong
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan 250012, China; Division of Gynecology oncology, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan 250012, China
| | - Yang Li
- Department of Gynecologic Oncology, Women's Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang 310006, China.
| | - Gang Chen
- Cancer Biology Research Center (Key Laboratory of the Ministry of Education), Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei 430030, China; Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei 430030, China.
| | - Kun Song
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan 250012, China; Division of Gynecology oncology, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan 250012, China.
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Matias-Guiu X, Selinger CI, Anderson L, Buza N, Ellenson LH, Fadare O, Ganesan R, Ip PPC, Palacios J, Parra-Herran C, Raspollini MR, Soslow RA, Werner HMJ, Lax SF, McCluggage WG. Data Set for the Reporting of Endometrial Cancer: Recommendations From the International Collaboration on Cancer Reporting (ICCR). Int J Gynecol Pathol 2022; 41:S90-S118. [PMID: 36305536 DOI: 10.1097/pgp.0000000000000901] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
Endometrial cancer is one of the most common cancers among women. The International Collaboration on Cancer Reporting (ICCR) developed a standardized endometrial cancer data set in 2011, which provided detailed recommendations for the reporting of resection specimens of these neoplasms. A new data set has been developed, which incorporates the updated 2020 World Health Organization Classification of Female Genital Tumors, the Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) molecular classification of endometrial cancers, and other major advances in endometrial cancer reporting, all of which necessitated a major revision of the data set. This updated data set has been produced by a panel of expert pathologists and an expert clinician and has been subject to international open consultation. The data set includes core elements which are unanimously agreed upon as essential for cancer diagnosis, clinical management, staging, or prognosis and noncore elements which are clinically important, but not essential. Explanatory notes are provided for each element. Adoption of this updated data set will result in improvements in endometrial cancer patient care.
Collapse
|
5
|
Shah VI, McCluggage WG. Clinical utility of pathology data: endometrial and tubo-ovarian carcinomas. Clin Mol Pathol 2022; 75:529-536. [PMID: 35853653 DOI: 10.1136/jclinpath-2022-208207] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/09/2022] [Accepted: 02/12/2022] [Indexed: 11/03/2022]
Abstract
Cancer resection specimens are usually reported using standardised proformas that consist of a list of elements, which include core (required) and non-core (recommended) items. Although all elements are generally included in the reports, the clinical importance of a particular parameter often depends on a variety of factors, including the clinical setting, local management guidelines and other pathological parameters. In this review, we briefly outline how histopathology data are used to guide management of patients with endometrial and tubo-ovarian cancers, the most common gynaecological malignancies, and provide advice as to which data elements are important in particular scenarios.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - W Glenn McCluggage
- Department of Pathology, Royal Group of Hospitals and Dental Hospital Health and Social Services Trust, Belfast, UK
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Kasius JC, Pijnenborg JMA, Lindemann K, Forsse D, van Zwol J, Kristensen GB, Krakstad C, Werner HMJ, Amant F. Risk Stratification of Endometrial Cancer Patients: FIGO Stage, Biomarkers and Molecular Classification. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13:cancers13225848. [PMID: 34831000 PMCID: PMC8616052 DOI: 10.3390/cancers13225848] [Citation(s) in RCA: 31] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/06/2021] [Accepted: 11/11/2021] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
Endometrial cancer (EC) is the most common gynaecologic malignancy in developed countries. The main challenge in EC management is to correctly estimate the risk of metastases at diagnosis and the risk to develop recurrences in the future. Risk stratification determines the need for surgical staging and adjuvant treatment. Detection of occult, microscopic metastases upstages patients, provides important prognostic information and guides adjuvant treatment. The molecular classification subdivides EC into four prognostic subgroups: POLE ultramutated; mismatch repair deficient (MMRd); nonspecific molecular profile (NSMP); and TP53 mutated (p53abn). How surgical staging should be adjusted based on preoperative molecular profiling is currently unknown. Moreover, little is known whether and how other known prognostic biomarkers affect prognosis prediction independent of or in addition to these molecular subgroups. This review summarizes the factors incorporated in surgical staging (i.e., peritoneal washing, lymph node dissection, omentectomy and peritoneal biopsies), and its impact on prognosis and adjuvant treatment decisions in an era of molecular classification of EC. Moreover, the relation between FIGO stage and molecular classification is evaluated including the current gaps in knowledge and future perspectives.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jenneke C. Kasius
- Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Amsterdam University Medical Centres, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (J.C.K.); (J.v.Z.)
| | | | - Kristina Lindemann
- Department of Gynaecologic Oncology, Oslo University Hospital, 0188 Oslo, Norway;
- Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, 0318 Oslo, Norway
| | - David Forsse
- Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Haukeland University Hospital, 5021 Bergen, Norway; (D.F.); (C.K.)
| | - Judith van Zwol
- Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Amsterdam University Medical Centres, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (J.C.K.); (J.v.Z.)
| | - Gunnar B. Kristensen
- Institute for Cancer Genetics and Informatics, Department of Oncology, Division of Cancer Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, 0424 Oslo, Norway;
| | - Camilla Krakstad
- Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Haukeland University Hospital, 5021 Bergen, Norway; (D.F.); (C.K.)
| | - Henrica M. J. Werner
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, GROW, Maastricht University School for Oncology & Developmental Biology, 6202 AZ Maastricht, The Netherlands;
| | - Frédéric Amant
- Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Amsterdam University Medical Centres, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (J.C.K.); (J.v.Z.)
- Department of Oncology, KU Leuven, 3000 Leuven, Belgium
- Department of Gynaecology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Correspondence:
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Corey L, Fucinari J, Elshaikh M, Schultz D, Mussallam R, Zaiem F, Daaboul F, Fehmi O, Dyson G, Ruterbusch J, Morris R, Cote ML, Ali-Fehmi R, Bandyopadhyay S. Impact of positive cytology in uterine serous carcinoma: A reassessment. Gynecol Oncol Rep 2021; 37:100830. [PMID: 34345643 PMCID: PMC8319448 DOI: 10.1016/j.gore.2021.100830] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/25/2021] [Revised: 06/07/2021] [Accepted: 07/04/2021] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
Abstract
Prognostic implications of peritoneal cytology in uterine serous cancer are unclear. Positive cytology is not associated with FIGO stage or LVSI. Peritoneal cytology is an independent prognosticator in uterine serous cancer. Positive cytology is independently associated with worse overall survival and ECSS.
Objectives The aim of this study was to evaluate the prognostic value of peritoneal cytology status among other clinicopathological parameters in uterine serous carcinoma (USC). Methods A retrospective study of 148 patients diagnosed with uterine serous carcinoma from 1997 to 2016 at two academic medical centers in the Detroit metropolitan area was done. A central gynecologic pathologist reviewed all available slides and confirmed the histologic diagnosis of each case of USC. We assessed the prognostic impact of various clinicopathological parameters on overall survival (OS) and endometrial cancer-specific survival (ECSS). Those parameters included race, body mass index (BMI), stage at diagnosis, tumor size, lymphovascular invasion (LVSI), peritoneal cytology status, receipt of adjuvant treatment, and comorbidity count using the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI). We used Cox proportional hazards models and 95% confidence intervals for statistical analysis. Results Positive peritoneal cytology had a statistically significant effect on OS (HR: 2.09, 95% CI: [1.19, 3.68]) and on ECSS (HR: 2.02, 95% CI: [1.06 – 3.82]). LVSI had a statistically significant effect on both OS (HR: 2.27, 95% CI: [1.14, 4.53]) and ECSS (HR: 3.45, 95% CI: [1.49, 7.99]). Black or African American (AA) race was also found to have a significant effect on both OS (HR: 1.92, 95% CI: [1.07, 3.47]) and ECSS (HR: 2.01, 95% CI: [1.02, 3.98]). Other factors including BMI and tumor size > 1 cm did not show a statistically significant impact on OS or ECSS. Conclusions Peritoneal washings with positive cytology and LVSI are important prognostic tools that may have a significant impact on overall survival in USC and can be used as independent negative prognosticators to help guide adjuvant treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Logan Corey
- Wayne State University, School of Medicine, Department of Oncology, Detroit, Michigan.,Karmanos Cancer Institute, Department of Gynecologic Oncology, Detroit, Michigan
| | - Juliana Fucinari
- Karmanos Cancer Institute, Population Sciences and Disparities Research, Detroit, Michigan
| | | | | | - Rami Mussallam
- Wayne State University, School of Medicine, Department of Pathology, Detroit, Michigan
| | - Feras Zaiem
- Wayne State University, School of Medicine, Department of Pathology, Detroit, Michigan
| | - Fayez Daaboul
- Wayne State University, School of Medicine, Department of Pathology, Detroit, Michigan
| | - Omar Fehmi
- University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan
| | - Greg Dyson
- Wayne State University, School of Medicine, Department of Oncology, Detroit, Michigan
| | - Julie Ruterbusch
- Wayne State University, School of Medicine, Department of Oncology, Detroit, Michigan
| | - Robert Morris
- Wayne State University, School of Medicine, Department of Oncology, Detroit, Michigan.,Karmanos Cancer Institute, Department of Gynecologic Oncology, Detroit, Michigan
| | - Michelle L Cote
- Wayne State University, School of Medicine, Department of Oncology, Detroit, Michigan.,Karmanos Cancer Institute, Population Sciences and Disparities Research, Detroit, Michigan
| | - Rouba Ali-Fehmi
- Wayne State University, School of Medicine, Department of Oncology, Detroit, Michigan
| | | |
Collapse
|
8
|
Takenaka M, Kamii M, Iida Y, Yanaihara N, Suzuki J, Takahashi K, Yanagida S, Saito M, Takano H, Yamada K, Okamoto A. Re-thinking the prognostic significance of positive peritoneal cytology in endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2021; 161:135-142. [PMID: 33551195 DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2021.01.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/14/2020] [Accepted: 01/10/2021] [Indexed: 10/22/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Whether abnormal peritoneal cytology (PC) is an independent prognostic factor in endometrial cancer (EC) remains controversial. This study aimed to re-think the prognostic significance of PC in not only all EC patients but also in various subgroups with similar clinicopathological and biological characteristics. METHODS EC patients who underwent primary surgery of at least a hysterectomy and were pathologically diagnosed with EC in four hospitals affiliated with the Jikei University School of Medicine were retrospectively reviewed. The prognostic significance of PC was evaluated with univariate and multivariate analyses in the entire cohort and subgroups stratified by surgical stages (early/advanced stages), tumor types (types 1/2), and risk classifications (low/intermediate/high). RESULTS Of 1963 EC cases, 1616 met the inclusion criteria. Positive PC was identified as an adverse prognostic factor in analyses of all EC cases and in all subgroup analyses stratified by surgical stages and tumor types. In survival curve comparisons, the progression-free survival (PFS) and disease-specific survival in early-stage patients with positive PC were clearly located between those of stage II patients with negative PC and stage III patients. In the subgroup analyses stratified by risk classification in early-stage EC, positive PC was related to poorer PFS in the intermediate- and high-risk groups but not in the low-risk group. CONCLUSION PC status was an independent prognostic factor of EC in all stages and tumor types. Early PC-positive cases, except for the low-risk group, may be recommended for upstaging and should be carefully managed compared with PC-negative cases.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Masataka Takenaka
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The Jikei University School of Medicine, 3-25-8 Nishi-Shinbashi, Minato-ku, Tokyo 105-8461, Japan.
| | - Misato Kamii
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The Jikei University School of Medicine, 3-25-8 Nishi-Shinbashi, Minato-ku, Tokyo 105-8461, Japan
| | - Yasushi Iida
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The Jikei University School of Medicine, 3-25-8 Nishi-Shinbashi, Minato-ku, Tokyo 105-8461, Japan
| | - Nozomu Yanaihara
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The Jikei University School of Medicine, 3-25-8 Nishi-Shinbashi, Minato-ku, Tokyo 105-8461, Japan
| | - Jiro Suzuki
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The Jikei University School of Medicine, 3-25-8 Nishi-Shinbashi, Minato-ku, Tokyo 105-8461, Japan
| | - Kazuaki Takahashi
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The Jikei University School of Medicine, 3-25-8 Nishi-Shinbashi, Minato-ku, Tokyo 105-8461, Japan
| | - Satoshi Yanagida
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The Jikei University School of Medicine, 3-25-8 Nishi-Shinbashi, Minato-ku, Tokyo 105-8461, Japan
| | - Motoaki Saito
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The Jikei University School of Medicine, 3-25-8 Nishi-Shinbashi, Minato-ku, Tokyo 105-8461, Japan
| | - Hirokuni Takano
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The Jikei University School of Medicine, 3-25-8 Nishi-Shinbashi, Minato-ku, Tokyo 105-8461, Japan
| | - Kyosuke Yamada
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The Jikei University School of Medicine, 3-25-8 Nishi-Shinbashi, Minato-ku, Tokyo 105-8461, Japan
| | - Aikou Okamoto
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The Jikei University School of Medicine, 3-25-8 Nishi-Shinbashi, Minato-ku, Tokyo 105-8461, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Ribeiro CM, Brito LGO, Benetti-Pinto CL, Teixeira JC, Yela DA. Is Diagnostic Hysteroscopy Safe for the Investigation of Type II Endometrial Cancer? A Retrospective Cohort Analysis. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2021; 28:1536-1543. [PMID: 33444791 DOI: 10.1016/j.jmig.2021.01.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/23/2020] [Revised: 12/31/2020] [Accepted: 01/05/2021] [Indexed: 11/20/2022]
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVE Although hysteroscopy (HSC) can be used for assessing the uterine cavity in women with suspected endometrial cancer (EC), it remains controversial as a procedure because it can potentially enhance the metastatic spread of cancer cells. Moreover, it is important to assess this hypothesis for type II EC, a more aggressive phenotype that usually presents with endometrial atrophy and has worse prognosis. Thus, we aimed to assess the prevalence of positive peritoneal cytology result in women with type II EC who underwent HSC as a diagnostic tool and to determine the factors associated with patient relapse/survival. DESIGN Retrospective cohort analysis (2002-2017). SETTING Tertiary, academic hospital. PATIENTS One hundred twenty-seven women with type II EC. INTERVENTIONS Diagnostic HSC (HSC) (n = 43) or dilation/curettage (D&C) (n = 84). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS Primary end point was the frequency of positive peritoneal cytology result. Survival curves were projected using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using the log-rank test. Cox regression analysis with hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated to assess the factors related with the disease-free survival (DFS) and the disease-specific survival (DSS). Advanced cancer stage and greater vascular invasion appeared more frequently in the D&C group (p = .008 and p = .04, respectively). Positive peritoneal cytology result was present in 2 of 43 (4.6%) women following HSC and in 9 of 84 (10.7%) following D&C (p = .22). DFS and DSS curves did not statistically differ between the groups. Multivariate analysis for DFS revealed that advanced cancer stage (III and IV) (HR = 4.67; 95% CI, 2.34-9.34; p <.001) and advanced age (HR = 1.08; 95% CI, 1.04-1.13]; p <.001) were the factors associated with relapse. For DSS, advanced age (HR = 1.08; 95% CI, 1.05-1.12; p <.001), cancer stage III/IV (HR = 3.95; 95% CI, 2.18-7.15; p <.001), and vascular invasion (HR = 2.47; 95% CI, 1.34-4.54; p = .004) increased the risk of mortality. CONCLUSION Diagnostic HSC did not increase the rate of positive peritoneal cytology result at the time of surgical staging in this cohort of women with type II EC and is probably as safe as D&C.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Carolina Machado Ribeiro
- Division of Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Surgery (Drs. Ribeiro, Brito, Benetti-Pinto, and Yela), Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medical Sciences, University of Campinas, Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil
| | - Luiz Gustavo Oliveira Brito
- Division of Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Surgery (Drs. Ribeiro, Brito, Benetti-Pinto, and Yela), Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medical Sciences, University of Campinas, Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil
| | - Cristina Laguna Benetti-Pinto
- Division of Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Surgery (Drs. Ribeiro, Brito, Benetti-Pinto, and Yela), Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medical Sciences, University of Campinas, Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil
| | - Júlio César Teixeira
- Divison of Gynecologic Oncology (Dr. Teixeira), Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medical Sciences, University of Campinas, Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil
| | - Daniela Angerame Yela
- Division of Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Surgery (Drs. Ribeiro, Brito, Benetti-Pinto, and Yela), Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medical Sciences, University of Campinas, Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil.
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Koyuncu K, Altın D, Turgay B, Varlı B, Konuralp B, Şükür YE, Taşkın S, Ortaç F. Binary grading may be more appropriate for endometrial cancer. J Turk Ger Gynecol Assoc 2020; 21:163-170. [PMID: 32885922 PMCID: PMC7495132 DOI: 10.4274/jtgga.galenos.2019.2019.0068] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/01/2022] Open
Abstract
Objective: To elucidate the survival consequences of the prognostic factors for endometrial cancer. Material and Methods: This was a retrospective study of 276 patients diagnosed with endometrial cancer who admitted for staging surgery. The extent of the surgery was determined by clinical staging and preoperative evaluation. The pathology specimens were reassessed by a gynecopathologist. Independent risk factors were revealed for the progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) utilizing Kaplan-Meier and “Cox” proportional analysis. Results: The median follow up of the patients was 50 months. Of the 29 patients who died, 15 (5.43%) died because of endometrial cancer. Multivariate analysis revealed that independent risk factors for OS and PFS were stage (p=0.002, 0.002, respectively) and grade 3 (G3) histology (p=0.013, 0.015, respectively). Positive peritoneal cytology was an independent risk factor for OS (p=0.024), but not for PFS (p=0.050). Stage (p=0.005) was found to be the only independent risk factor for DSS. Patients with G1 and G2 histology had a similar and more favorable prognosis than patients with G3 histology. Conclusion: Advanced stage, high-grade tumor and the presence of positive peritoneal cytology were ascertained as independent prognostic factors for endometrial cancer. A binary histological grading system could be simpler and as effective as the current three grade system because grade 1 and 2 patients showed similar prognosis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kazibe Koyuncu
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ankara University Faculty of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey
| | - Duygu Altın
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ankara University Faculty of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey
| | - Batuhan Turgay
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ankara University Faculty of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey
| | - Bulut Varlı
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ankara University Faculty of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey
| | - Bahar Konuralp
- Clinic of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Health Sciences Turkey, Tepecik Traning and Research Hospital, İzmir, Turkey
| | - Yavuz Emre Şükür
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ankara University Faculty of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey
| | - Salih Taşkın
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ankara University Faculty of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey
| | - Fırat Ortaç
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ankara University Faculty of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Matsuo K, Nusbaum DJ, Matsuzaki S, Chang EJ, Roman LD, Wright JD, Harter P, Klar M. Malignant peritoneal cytology and increased mortality risk in stage I non-endometrioid endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2020; 159:43-51. [PMID: 32690393 DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2020.07.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/05/2020] [Accepted: 07/06/2020] [Indexed: 12/30/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To examine the survival of women with stage I non-endometrioid endometrial cancer with malignant peritoneal cytology. METHODS A retrospective observational cohort study was conducted to examine the National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program from 2010 to 2016. Women with stage I serous, clear cell, carcinosarcoma, undifferentiated, and mixed endometrial cancer with known peritoneal cytology results at hysterectomy were examined (N = 4506). Propensity score inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to balance the measured covariates, and survival outcomes were assessed according to peritoneal cytology results. RESULTS Malignant peritoneal cytology was reported in 401 (8.9%) women. In multivariable analysis, older age, serous histology, and large tumors were associated with an increased likelihood of malignant peritoneal cytology (all, P < 0.05). In a propensity score weighted model, malignant peritoneal cytology was associated with a nearly two-fold increase in all-cause mortality risk compared to negative peritoneal cytology (5-year rates, 63.4% versus 80.2%, hazard ratio 2.18, 95% confidence interval 1.78-2.66). In sensitivity analyses, malignant peritoneal cytology was associated with decreased overall survival in old and young age groups, serous, clear cell, carcinosarcoma, and mixed histology groups, stage T1a disease, and staged and unstaged cases, but not for stage T1b disease. Difference in 5-year overall survival rates between the malignant and negative peritoneal cytology groups was particularly large among those with clear cell histology (24.0%), stage T1a disease (19.4%), aged >78 years (18.2%), and serous tumors (17.6%). CONCLUSION Malignant peritoneal cytology can be prevalent in stage I non-endometrioid endometrial cancer. Our study suggests that malignant peritoneal cytology is a prognostic factor for decreased survival in stage I non-endometrioid endometrial cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Koji Matsuo
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA; Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
| | - David J Nusbaum
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Shinya Matsuzaki
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Erica J Chang
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Lynda D Roman
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA; Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Jason D Wright
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York, NY, USA
| | - Philipp Harter
- Department of Gynecology and Gynecologic Oncology, Kliniken Essen-Mitte, Essen, Germany
| | - Maximilian Klar
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Dong Y, Wang Z, Wang J. Positive peritoneal cytology is an independent risk factor in endometrial cancer. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 2020; 46:1842-1850. [PMID: 32643298 DOI: 10.1111/jog.14361] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/17/2020] [Revised: 05/04/2020] [Accepted: 05/31/2020] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Yangyang Dong
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing, China
| | - Zhiqi Wang
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing, China
| | - Jianliu Wang
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing, China
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Guo J, Qian H, Ma F, Zhang Y, Cui X, Duan H. The characteristics of isolated para-aortic lymph node metastases in endometrial cancer and their prognostic significance. Ther Adv Med Oncol 2020; 12:1758835920933036. [PMID: 32587635 PMCID: PMC7294490 DOI: 10.1177/1758835920933036] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/10/2020] [Accepted: 05/19/2020] [Indexed: 12/25/2022] Open
Abstract
Background The aim of this study was to clarify the features and prognostic significance of isolated para-aortic lymphatic metastasis of endometrial cancer. Methods A retrospective study of patients with stage IIIC endometrial cancer was performed based on the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. A total of 2767 patients were divided into three groups according to the lymphatic metastasis patterns: isolated pelvic lymphatic metastasis, isolated para-aortic lymphatic metastasis and dual lymphatic metastasis. The clinic-pathological characteristics and prognosis of patients were compared among the three groups. Result The proportion of patients with isolated para-aortic lymphatic metastasis was 13.70%. Patients with isolated pelvic lymphatic metastasis or isolated para-aortic lymphatic metastasis shared similar histological characteristics, except that patients with isolated para-aortic lymphatic metastasis had a lower proportion of tumors over 5 cm in diameter than patients with isolated pelvic lymphatic metastasis (35.1% versus 45.7%, p = 0.001). Compared with patients with dual lymphatic metastasis, isolated para-aortic lymphatic metastasis was more common in patients with endometrioid tumors (78.6% versus 67.3%, p < 0.001), grade 1-2 cancers (53.3% versus 36.3%, p < 0.001) and negative peritoneal cytology (76.2% versus 61.1%, p < 0.001). Dual lymphatic metastasis was an independent predictive factor for the poor outcomes of patients at stage IIIC. However, in stage IIIC endometrioid tumors, patients with isolated pelvic lymphatic metastasis and those with isolated para-aortic lymphatic metastasis shared similar prognosis. Patients at stage IIIC with nonendometrioid tumors and patients at stage IV could not be further divided into subgroups according to lymphatic metastasis patterns in terms of prognosis. Conclusion Endometrioid patients with isolated pelvic lymphatic metastasis and isolated para-aortic lymphatic metastasis share similar clinical pathological characteristics and prognoses.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jianbin Guo
- Department of Gynecological Minimal Invasive Center, Beijing Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China
| | - Haili Qian
- State Key Laboratory of Molecular Oncology, National Cancer Center/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China
| | - Fei Ma
- Department of Medical Oncology, National Cancer Center/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China
| | - Ying Zhang
- Department of Gynecological Minimal Invasive Center, Beijing Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital, Capital Medical University, No. 17, Qihelou Street, Dongcheng District, Beijing 100006, China
| | - Xiujuan Cui
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Tengzhou Central People's Hospital, Shandong, China
| | - Hua Duan
- Department of Gynecological Minimal Invasive Center, Beijing Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Vizza E, Mancini E, Laquintana V, Loria R, Carosi M, Baiocco E, Cicchillitti L, Piaggio G, Patrizi L, Sperduti I, Zampa A, Cutillo G, Falcioni R, Corrado G. The prognostic significance of positive peritoneal cytology in endometrial cancer and its correlations with L1-CAM biomarker. Surg Oncol 2019; 28:151-157. [PMID: 30851892 DOI: 10.1016/j.suronc.2019.01.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/07/2018] [Revised: 11/28/2018] [Accepted: 01/02/2019] [Indexed: 11/22/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The aim of this study was to evaluate the prognostic role of positive peritoneal cytology (PPC) in a cohort of patients with endometrial cancer (EC). The secondary objective was to correlate the PPC and the expression of L1CAM in a group of patients with recurrence endometrial disease. METHODS All women diagnosed with EC and who performed a peritoneal cytology at "Regina Elena" National Cancer Institute of Rome from 2001 to 2013 were included in the study. Patients were divided into two groups according to positivity at peritoneal cytology. Moreover, patients with a recurrence disease and whose a tissue microarray (TMA) tumor sample was available underwent a L1CAM analysis. RESULTS Seven hundred sixty six patients underwent to EC staging in our Institute: 696 (90.8%) with negative and 70 (9.2%) with positive cytology. Five-year recurrence rate was higher in women with PPC (46.9% vs 18.4%, p = 0 < 0.0001) and, in particular, distant recurrence (86.7% vs 53.4%, p = 0.03). Moreover, we found an interesting pattern of recurrence disease in the group of early stage of EC with NPC and positive L1CAM. CONCLUSIONS Our results support the data that PPC may be a potential prognostic factor in early EC, due to its significant association with other risk factors and its significant influence on survival. Our findings confirm the need for large studies that point out the role of PPC and new prognostic factors, including biomarkers as L1CAM.
Collapse
MESH Headings
- Adenocarcinoma, Clear Cell/metabolism
- Adenocarcinoma, Clear Cell/pathology
- Adenocarcinoma, Clear Cell/surgery
- Aged
- Biomarkers, Tumor/metabolism
- Carcinoma, Squamous Cell/metabolism
- Carcinoma, Squamous Cell/pathology
- Carcinoma, Squamous Cell/surgery
- Case-Control Studies
- Cystadenocarcinoma, Serous/metabolism
- Cystadenocarcinoma, Serous/pathology
- Cystadenocarcinoma, Serous/surgery
- Cytodiagnosis
- Endometrial Neoplasms/metabolism
- Endometrial Neoplasms/pathology
- Endometrial Neoplasms/surgery
- Female
- Follow-Up Studies
- Humans
- Middle Aged
- Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/metabolism
- Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/pathology
- Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/surgery
- Neoplasm Staging
- Neural Cell Adhesion Molecule L1/metabolism
- Peritoneal Neoplasms/metabolism
- Peritoneal Neoplasms/pathology
- Peritoneal Neoplasms/surgery
- Retrospective Studies
- Risk Factors
- Survival Rate
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Enrico Vizza
- Department of Experimental Clinical Oncology, Gynecologic Oncology Unit, IRCCS "Regina Elena" National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy
| | - Emanuela Mancini
- Department of Experimental Clinical Oncology, Gynecologic Oncology Unit, IRCCS "Regina Elena" National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy
| | - Valentina Laquintana
- Department of Research, Advanced Diagnostics and Technological Innovation, Area of Translational Research, IRCCS "Regina Elena" National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy
| | - Rossella Loria
- Department of Research, Advanced Diagnostics and Technological Innovation, Area of Translational Research, IRCCS "Regina Elena" National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy
| | - Mariantonia Carosi
- Department of Research, Advanced Diagnostics and Technological Innovation, Anatomy Pathology Unit IRCCS "Regina Elena" National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy
| | - Ermelinda Baiocco
- Department of Experimental Clinical Oncology, Gynecologic Oncology Unit, IRCCS "Regina Elena" National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy
| | - Lucia Cicchillitti
- Department of Experimental Clinical Oncology, Gynecologic Oncology Unit, IRCCS "Regina Elena" National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy
| | - Giulia Piaggio
- Department of Research, Advanced Diagnostics and Technological Innovation, Area of Translational Research, IRCCS "Regina Elena" National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy
| | - Lodovico Patrizi
- Department of Biomedicine and Prevention, Obstetrics and Gynecology Unit, University of Rome "Tor Vergata", Rome, Italy
| | - Isabella Sperduti
- Scientific Direction, IRCCS "Regina Elena" National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy
| | - Ashanti Zampa
- Department of Experimental Clinical Oncology, Gynecologic Oncology Unit, IRCCS "Regina Elena" National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy
| | - Giuseppe Cutillo
- Department of Experimental Clinical Oncology, Gynecologic Oncology Unit, IRCCS "Regina Elena" National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy
| | - Rita Falcioni
- Department of Research, Advanced Diagnostics and Technological Innovation, Area of Translational Research, IRCCS "Regina Elena" National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy
| | - Giacomo Corrado
- Department of Women and Children Health, Gynecologic Oncology Unit, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli - IRCCS, Rome, Italy.
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Tate K, Yoshida H, Ishikawa M, Uehara T, Ikeda SI, Hiraoka N, Kato T. Prognostic factors for patients with early-stage uterine serous carcinoma without adjuvant therapy. J Gynecol Oncol 2018. [PMID: 29533019 PMCID: PMC5920218 DOI: 10.3802/jgo.2018.29.e34] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
Objective Uterine serous carcinoma (USC) is an aggressive type 2 endometrial cancer. Data on prognostic factors for patients with early-stage USC without adjuvant therapy are limited. This study aims to assess the baseline recurrence risk of early-stage USC patients without adjuvant treatment and to identify prognostic factors and patients who need adjuvant therapy. Methods Sixty-eight patients with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage I–II USC between 1997 and 2016 were included. All the cases did not undergo adjuvant treatment as institutional practice. Clinicopathological features, recurrence patterns, and survival outcomes were analyzed to determine prognostic factors. Results FIGO stages IA, IB, and II were observed in 42, 7, and 19 cases, respectively. Median follow-up time was 60 months. Five-year disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) rates for all cases were 73.9% and 78.0%, respectively. On multivariate analysis, cervical stromal involvement and positive pelvic cytology were significant predictors of DFS and OS, and ≥1/2 myometrial invasion was also a significant predictor of OS. Of 68 patients, 38 patients had no cervical stromal invasion or positive pelvic cytology and showed 88.8% 5-year DFS and 93.6% 5-year OS. Conclusion Cervical stromal invasion and positive pelvic cytology are prognostic factors for stage I–II USC. Patients with stage IA or IB USC showing negative pelvic cytology may have an extremely favorable prognosis and need not receive any adjuvant therapies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Keisei Tate
- Department of Gynecology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
| | - Hiroshi Yoshida
- Department of Pathology and Clinical Laboratories, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Mitsuya Ishikawa
- Department of Gynecology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Takashi Uehara
- Department of Gynecology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Shun Ichi Ikeda
- Department of Gynecology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Nobuyoshi Hiraoka
- Department of Pathology and Clinical Laboratories, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Tomoyasu Kato
- Department of Gynecology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Chen J, Clark LH, Kong WM, Yan Z, Han C, Zhao H, Liu TT, Zhang TQ, Song D, Jiao SM, Zhou C. Does hysteroscopy worsen prognosis in women with type II endometrial carcinoma? PLoS One 2017; 12:e0174226. [PMID: 28334032 PMCID: PMC5363864 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0174226] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/31/2016] [Accepted: 03/05/2017] [Indexed: 01/07/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Prior studies evaluating the impact of hysteroscopy on outcomes in endometrial cancer have predominantly evaluated type I tumors. We sought to evaluate whether hysteroscopy worsens prognosis in type II endometrial cancer. Methods A retrospective cohort analysis of 140 patients from two institutions with type II endometrial cancer was performed. Women who underwent either diagnostic hysteroscopy (HSC) or dilation and curettage (D&C) for cancer diagnosis from June 2001 until June 2010 were included. The clinical and pathologic characteristics, including peritoneal cytology results were reviewed. The primary endpoint was disease-specific survival (DSS). The exposure of interest was hysteroscopy. Survival curves were projected using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using the log-rank test. Results There was no difference in age, histology, stage, depth of myometrial invasion, adnexal involvement, or nodal metastasis between HSC and D&C patients. Positive cytology was found in 16/54 (30%) patients following HSC and in 10/86 (12%) following D&C (p = 0.008). Fourteen patients with stage I and II disease had positive peritoneal cytology, with 11/40 (27.5%) patients in the HSC group and 3/59 (5%) patients in the D&C group(p = 0.002). Median DSS was clinically different for the HSC and D&C groups, but statistical significance was not reached (53 versus 63.5 months, p = 0.34). For stage I and II patients, 18/99 (18%) were dead of EC, with a median DSS of 60 months for HSC and 71 months for D&C (p = 0.82). Overall 46 (33%) patients developed a recurrence, with 18/54 (33%) in the HSC group compared to 28/86 (32%) in the D&C group (p = 0.92). There was no difference in recurrence location between groups. Conclusions Diagnostic hysteroscopy significantly increased the rate of positive peritoneal cytology at the time of surgical staging in this cohort of patients with type II EC. However, we were unable to detect a difference in prognosis as measured by DSS.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jiao Chen
- Department of Gynecological Oncology, Beijing Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China
| | - Leslie H. Clark
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States of America
- Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States of America
| | - Wei-Min Kong
- Department of Gynecological Oncology, Beijing Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China
- * E-mail: (WMK); (CZ)
| | - Zhen Yan
- Department of Gynecological Oncology, Beijing Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China
| | - Chao Han
- Department of Gynecological Oncology, Beijing Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China
| | - Hui Zhao
- Department of Gynecological Oncology, Beijing Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China
| | - Ting-Ting Liu
- Department of Gynecological Oncology, Beijing Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China
| | - Tong-Qing Zhang
- Department of Gynecological Oncology, Beijing Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China
| | - Dan Song
- Department of Gynecological Oncology, Beijing Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China
| | - Si-Meng Jiao
- Department of Gynecological Oncology, Beijing Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China
| | - Chunxiao Zhou
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States of America
- Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States of America
- * E-mail: (WMK); (CZ)
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Abstract
On a clinicopathological and molecular level, two distinctive types of endometrial carcinoma, type I and type II, can be distinguished. Endometrioid carcinoma, the typical type I carcinoma, seems to develop through an estrogen-driven "adenoma carcinoma" pathway from atypical endometrial hyperplasia/endometrioid intraepithelial neoplasia (AEH/EIN). It is associated with elevated serum estrogen and high body mass index and expresses estrogen and progesterone receptors. They are mostly low grade and show a favorable prognosis. A subset progresses into high-grade carcinoma which is accompanied by loss of receptor expression and accumulation of TP53 mutations and behaves poorly. Other frequently altered genes in type I carcinomas are K-Ras, PTEN, and ß-catenin. Another frequent feature of type I carcinomas is microsatellite instability mainly caused by methylation of the MLH1 promoter. In contrast, the typical type II carcinoma, serous carcinoma, is not estrogen related since it usually occurs in a small uterus with atrophic endometrium. It is often associated with a flat putative precursor lesion called serous endometrial intraepithelial carcinoma (SEIC). The molecular pathogenesis of serous carcinoma seems to be driven by TP53 mutations, which are present in SEIC. Other molecular changes in serous carcinoma detectable by immunohistochemistry involve cyclin E and p16. Since many of the aforementioned molecular changes can be demonstrated by immunohistochemistry, they are useful ancillary diagnostic tools and may further contribute to a future molecular classification of endometrial carcinoma as recently suggested based on The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) data.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sigurd F Lax
- Department of Pathology, Hospital Graz Süd-West, Academic Teaching Hospital of the Medical University Graz, Göstingerstrasse 22, 8020, Graz, Austria.
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Colombo N, Creutzberg C, Amant F, Bosse T, González-Martín A, Ledermann J, Marth C, Nout R, Querleu D, Mirza MR, Sessa C. ESMO-ESGO-ESTRO Consensus Conference on Endometrial Cancer: Diagnosis, Treatment and Follow-up. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2016; 26:2-30. [PMID: 26645990 PMCID: PMC4679344 DOI: 10.1097/igc.0000000000000609] [Citation(s) in RCA: 441] [Impact Index Per Article: 55.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
The first joint European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), European SocieTy for Radiotherapy & Oncology (ESTRO) and European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO) consensus conference on endometrial cancer was held on 11-13 December 2014 in Milan, Italy, and comprised a multidisciplinary panel of 40 leading experts in the management of endometrial cancer. Before the conference, the expert panel prepared three clinically-relevant questions about endometrial cancer relating to the following four areas: prevention and screening, surgery, adjuvant treatment and advanced and recurrent disease. All relevant scientific literature, as identified by the experts, was reviewed in advance. During the consensus conference, the panel developed recommendations for each specific question and a consensus was reached. Results of this consensus conference, together with a summary of evidence supporting each recommendation, are detailed in this article. All participants have approved this final article.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nicoletta Colombo
- *Division of Medical Gynecologic Oncology, European Institute of Oncology and University of Milan-Bicocca, Milan, Italy; †Department of Radiation Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands; ‡Department of Gynecological Oncology, University Hospital Leuven, Leuven, Belgium and Center for Gynecological Oncology Amsterdam (CGOA), Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; §Department of Pathology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands; ∥Medical Oncology Department, GEICO and MD Anderson Cancer Center, Madrid, Spain; ¶Department of Oncology and Cancer Trials, UCL Cancer Institute, London, United Kingdom; #Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Innsbruck Medical University, Innsbruck, Austria; **Department of Radiotherapy, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands; ††Department of Surgery, Institut Bergonié, Bordeaux, France and Gynecology and Obstetrics Department, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; ‡‡Department of Oncology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark; and §§Department of Medical Oncology, Oncology Institute of Southern Switzerland, Ospedale San Giovanni, Bellinzona, Switzerland
| | - Carien Creutzberg
- *Division of Medical Gynecologic Oncology, European Institute of Oncology and University of Milan-Bicocca, Milan, Italy; †Department of Radiation Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands; ‡Department of Gynecological Oncology, University Hospital Leuven, Leuven, Belgium and Center for Gynecological Oncology Amsterdam (CGOA), Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; §Department of Pathology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands; ∥Medical Oncology Department, GEICO and MD Anderson Cancer Center, Madrid, Spain; ¶Department of Oncology and Cancer Trials, UCL Cancer Institute, London, United Kingdom; #Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Innsbruck Medical University, Innsbruck, Austria; **Department of Radiotherapy, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands; ††Department of Surgery, Institut Bergonié, Bordeaux, France and Gynecology and Obstetrics Department, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; ‡‡Department of Oncology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark; and §§Department of Medical Oncology, Oncology Institute of Southern Switzerland, Ospedale San Giovanni, Bellinzona, Switzerland
| | - Frederic Amant
- *Division of Medical Gynecologic Oncology, European Institute of Oncology and University of Milan-Bicocca, Milan, Italy; †Department of Radiation Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands; ‡Department of Gynecological Oncology, University Hospital Leuven, Leuven, Belgium and Center for Gynecological Oncology Amsterdam (CGOA), Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; §Department of Pathology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands; ∥Medical Oncology Department, GEICO and MD Anderson Cancer Center, Madrid, Spain; ¶Department of Oncology and Cancer Trials, UCL Cancer Institute, London, United Kingdom; #Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Innsbruck Medical University, Innsbruck, Austria; **Department of Radiotherapy, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands; ††Department of Surgery, Institut Bergonié, Bordeaux, France and Gynecology and Obstetrics Department, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; ‡‡Department of Oncology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark; and §§Department of Medical Oncology, Oncology Institute of Southern Switzerland, Ospedale San Giovanni, Bellinzona, Switzerland
| | - Tjalling Bosse
- *Division of Medical Gynecologic Oncology, European Institute of Oncology and University of Milan-Bicocca, Milan, Italy; †Department of Radiation Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands; ‡Department of Gynecological Oncology, University Hospital Leuven, Leuven, Belgium and Center for Gynecological Oncology Amsterdam (CGOA), Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; §Department of Pathology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands; ∥Medical Oncology Department, GEICO and MD Anderson Cancer Center, Madrid, Spain; ¶Department of Oncology and Cancer Trials, UCL Cancer Institute, London, United Kingdom; #Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Innsbruck Medical University, Innsbruck, Austria; **Department of Radiotherapy, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands; ††Department of Surgery, Institut Bergonié, Bordeaux, France and Gynecology and Obstetrics Department, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; ‡‡Department of Oncology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark; and §§Department of Medical Oncology, Oncology Institute of Southern Switzerland, Ospedale San Giovanni, Bellinzona, Switzerland
| | - Antonio González-Martín
- *Division of Medical Gynecologic Oncology, European Institute of Oncology and University of Milan-Bicocca, Milan, Italy; †Department of Radiation Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands; ‡Department of Gynecological Oncology, University Hospital Leuven, Leuven, Belgium and Center for Gynecological Oncology Amsterdam (CGOA), Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; §Department of Pathology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands; ∥Medical Oncology Department, GEICO and MD Anderson Cancer Center, Madrid, Spain; ¶Department of Oncology and Cancer Trials, UCL Cancer Institute, London, United Kingdom; #Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Innsbruck Medical University, Innsbruck, Austria; **Department of Radiotherapy, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands; ††Department of Surgery, Institut Bergonié, Bordeaux, France and Gynecology and Obstetrics Department, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; ‡‡Department of Oncology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark; and §§Department of Medical Oncology, Oncology Institute of Southern Switzerland, Ospedale San Giovanni, Bellinzona, Switzerland
| | - Jonathan Ledermann
- *Division of Medical Gynecologic Oncology, European Institute of Oncology and University of Milan-Bicocca, Milan, Italy; †Department of Radiation Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands; ‡Department of Gynecological Oncology, University Hospital Leuven, Leuven, Belgium and Center for Gynecological Oncology Amsterdam (CGOA), Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; §Department of Pathology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands; ∥Medical Oncology Department, GEICO and MD Anderson Cancer Center, Madrid, Spain; ¶Department of Oncology and Cancer Trials, UCL Cancer Institute, London, United Kingdom; #Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Innsbruck Medical University, Innsbruck, Austria; **Department of Radiotherapy, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands; ††Department of Surgery, Institut Bergonié, Bordeaux, France and Gynecology and Obstetrics Department, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; ‡‡Department of Oncology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark; and §§Department of Medical Oncology, Oncology Institute of Southern Switzerland, Ospedale San Giovanni, Bellinzona, Switzerland
| | - Christian Marth
- *Division of Medical Gynecologic Oncology, European Institute of Oncology and University of Milan-Bicocca, Milan, Italy; †Department of Radiation Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands; ‡Department of Gynecological Oncology, University Hospital Leuven, Leuven, Belgium and Center for Gynecological Oncology Amsterdam (CGOA), Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; §Department of Pathology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands; ∥Medical Oncology Department, GEICO and MD Anderson Cancer Center, Madrid, Spain; ¶Department of Oncology and Cancer Trials, UCL Cancer Institute, London, United Kingdom; #Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Innsbruck Medical University, Innsbruck, Austria; **Department of Radiotherapy, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands; ††Department of Surgery, Institut Bergonié, Bordeaux, France and Gynecology and Obstetrics Department, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; ‡‡Department of Oncology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark; and §§Department of Medical Oncology, Oncology Institute of Southern Switzerland, Ospedale San Giovanni, Bellinzona, Switzerland
| | - Remi Nout
- *Division of Medical Gynecologic Oncology, European Institute of Oncology and University of Milan-Bicocca, Milan, Italy; †Department of Radiation Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands; ‡Department of Gynecological Oncology, University Hospital Leuven, Leuven, Belgium and Center for Gynecological Oncology Amsterdam (CGOA), Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; §Department of Pathology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands; ∥Medical Oncology Department, GEICO and MD Anderson Cancer Center, Madrid, Spain; ¶Department of Oncology and Cancer Trials, UCL Cancer Institute, London, United Kingdom; #Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Innsbruck Medical University, Innsbruck, Austria; **Department of Radiotherapy, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands; ††Department of Surgery, Institut Bergonié, Bordeaux, France and Gynecology and Obstetrics Department, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; ‡‡Department of Oncology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark; and §§Department of Medical Oncology, Oncology Institute of Southern Switzerland, Ospedale San Giovanni, Bellinzona, Switzerland
| | - Denis Querleu
- *Division of Medical Gynecologic Oncology, European Institute of Oncology and University of Milan-Bicocca, Milan, Italy; †Department of Radiation Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands; ‡Department of Gynecological Oncology, University Hospital Leuven, Leuven, Belgium and Center for Gynecological Oncology Amsterdam (CGOA), Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; §Department of Pathology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands; ∥Medical Oncology Department, GEICO and MD Anderson Cancer Center, Madrid, Spain; ¶Department of Oncology and Cancer Trials, UCL Cancer Institute, London, United Kingdom; #Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Innsbruck Medical University, Innsbruck, Austria; **Department of Radiotherapy, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands; ††Department of Surgery, Institut Bergonié, Bordeaux, France and Gynecology and Obstetrics Department, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; ‡‡Department of Oncology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark; and §§Department of Medical Oncology, Oncology Institute of Southern Switzerland, Ospedale San Giovanni, Bellinzona, Switzerland
| | - Mansoor Raza Mirza
- *Division of Medical Gynecologic Oncology, European Institute of Oncology and University of Milan-Bicocca, Milan, Italy; †Department of Radiation Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands; ‡Department of Gynecological Oncology, University Hospital Leuven, Leuven, Belgium and Center for Gynecological Oncology Amsterdam (CGOA), Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; §Department of Pathology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands; ∥Medical Oncology Department, GEICO and MD Anderson Cancer Center, Madrid, Spain; ¶Department of Oncology and Cancer Trials, UCL Cancer Institute, London, United Kingdom; #Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Innsbruck Medical University, Innsbruck, Austria; **Department of Radiotherapy, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands; ††Department of Surgery, Institut Bergonié, Bordeaux, France and Gynecology and Obstetrics Department, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; ‡‡Department of Oncology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark; and §§Department of Medical Oncology, Oncology Institute of Southern Switzerland, Ospedale San Giovanni, Bellinzona, Switzerland
| | - Cristiana Sessa
- *Division of Medical Gynecologic Oncology, European Institute of Oncology and University of Milan-Bicocca, Milan, Italy; †Department of Radiation Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands; ‡Department of Gynecological Oncology, University Hospital Leuven, Leuven, Belgium and Center for Gynecological Oncology Amsterdam (CGOA), Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; §Department of Pathology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands; ∥Medical Oncology Department, GEICO and MD Anderson Cancer Center, Madrid, Spain; ¶Department of Oncology and Cancer Trials, UCL Cancer Institute, London, United Kingdom; #Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Innsbruck Medical University, Innsbruck, Austria; **Department of Radiotherapy, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands; ††Department of Surgery, Institut Bergonié, Bordeaux, France and Gynecology and Obstetrics Department, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; ‡‡Department of Oncology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark; and §§Department of Medical Oncology, Oncology Institute of Southern Switzerland, Ospedale San Giovanni, Bellinzona, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Colombo N, Creutzberg C, Amant F, Bosse T, González-Martín A, Ledermann J, Marth C, Nout R, Querleu D, Mirza MR, Sessa C, Altundag O, Amant F, van Leeuwenhoek A, Banerjee S, Bosse T, Casado A, de Agustín L, Cibula D, Colombo N, Creutzberg C, del Campo JM, Emons G, Goffin F, González-Martín A, Greggi S, Haie-Meder C, Katsaros D, Kesic V, Kurzeder C, Lax S, Lécuru F, Ledermann J, Levy T, Lorusso D, Mäenpää J, Marth C, Matias-Guiu X, Morice P, Nijman H, Nout R, Powell M, Querleu D, Mirza M, Reed N, Rodolakis A, Salvesen H, Sehouli J, Sessa C, Taylor A, Westermann A, Zeimet A. ESMO-ESGO-ESTRO Consensus Conference on Endometrial Cancer: diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol 2015; 27:16-41. [PMID: 26634381 DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdv484] [Citation(s) in RCA: 718] [Impact Index Per Article: 79.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/17/2015] [Accepted: 10/05/2015] [Indexed: 12/27/2022] Open
Abstract
The first joint European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), European SocieTy for Radiotherapy & Oncology (ESTRO) and European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO) consensus conference on endometrial cancer was held on 11-13 December 2014 in Milan, Italy, and comprised a multidisciplinary panel of 40 leading experts in the management of endometrial cancer. Before the conference, the expert panel prepared three clinically relevant questions about endometrial cancer relating to the following four areas: prevention and screening, surgery, adjuvant treatment and advanced and recurrent disease. All relevant scientific literature, as identified by the experts, was reviewed in advance. During the consensus conference, the panel developed recommendations for each specific question and a consensus was reached. Results of this consensus conference, together with a summary of evidence supporting each recommendation, are detailed in this article. All participants have approved this final article.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- N Colombo
- Division of Medical Gynecologic Oncology, European Institute of Oncology and University of Milan-Bicocca, Milan, Italy
| | - C Creutzberg
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - F Amant
- Department of Gynecological Oncology, University Hospital Leuven, Leuven, Belgium Center for Gynecological Oncology Amsterdam (CGOA), Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam
| | - T Bosse
- Department of Pathology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - A González-Martín
- Department of Medical Oncology, GEICO Cancer Center, Madrid Department of Medical Oncology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Madrid, Spain
| | - J Ledermann
- Department of Oncology and Cancer Trials, UCL Cancer Institute, London, UK
| | - C Marth
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Innsbruck Medical University, Innsbruck, Austria
| | - R Nout
- Department of Radiotherapy, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - D Querleu
- Department of Surgery, Institut Bergonié, Bordeaux, France Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Canada
| | - M R Mirza
- Department of Oncology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - C Sessa
- Department of Medical Oncology, Oncology Institute of Southern Switzerland, Ospedale San Giovanni, Bellinzona, Switzerland
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
20
|
ESMO–ESGO–ESTRO consensus conference on endometrial cancer: Diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Radiother Oncol 2015; 117:559-81. [DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2015.11.013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 142] [Impact Index Per Article: 15.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/16/2015] [Accepted: 11/18/2015] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
|
21
|
Mahdi H, Nutter B, Abdul-Karim F, Amarnath S, Rose PG. The impact of combined radiation and chemotherapy on outcome in uterine papillary serous carcinoma compared to chemotherapy alone. J Gynecol Oncol 2015; 27:e19. [PMID: 26463437 PMCID: PMC4717224 DOI: 10.3802/jgo.2016.27.e19] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/09/2015] [Revised: 07/22/2015] [Accepted: 07/29/2015] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To investigate the impact of pelvic radiation on survival in patients with uterine serous carcinoma (USC) who received adjuvant chemotherapy. METHODS Patients with stage I-IV USC were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program 2000 to 2009. Patients were included if treated with surgery and chemotherapy. Patients were divided into two groups: those who received chemotherapy and pelvic radiation therapy (CT_RT) and those who received chemotherapy only (CT). Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox regression proportional hazard models were used. RESULTS Of the 1,838 included patients, 1,272 (69%) were CT and 566 (31%) were CT_RT. Adjuvant radiation was associated with significant improvement in overall survival (OS; p<0.001) and disease-specific survival (DSS; p<0.001) for entire cohort. These findings were consistent for the impact of radiation on OS (p<0.001) and DSS (p<0.001) in advanced stage (III-IV) disease but not for early stage (I?II) disease (p=0.21 for OS and p=0.82 for DSS). In multivariable analysis adjusting for age, stage, race and extent of lymphadenectomy, adjuvant radiation was a significant predictor of OS and DSS for entire cohort (p=0.003 and p=0.05) and in subset of patients with stage III (p=0.02 and p=0.07) but not for patients with stage I (p=0.59 and p=0.49), II (p=0.83 and p=0.82), and IV USC (p=0.50 and p=0.96). Other predictors were stage, positive cytology, African American race and extent of lymphadenectomy. CONCLUSION In USC patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy, adjuvant radiation was associated with significantly improved outcome in stage III disease but not for other stages. Positive cytology, extent of lymphadenectomy and African race were significant predictors of outcome.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Haider Mahdi
- Gynecologic Oncology Division, Ob/Gyn and Women's Health Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA.
| | - Benjamin Nutter
- Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Fadi Abdul-Karim
- Department of Anatomic Pathology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Sudha Amarnath
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Peter G Rose
- Gynecologic Oncology Division, Ob/Gyn and Women's Health Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Abstract
AIMS To investigate whether positive peritoneal cytology (PPC) has an effect on expected survival in endometrial cancer and to present factors that affect PPC occurrence. METHODS Patient chart information of 224 patients who had been treated at the Ankara Oncology Education and Research Hospital due to endometrial cancer between 1996 and 2006 were retrospectively reviewed. Factors that were likely to have an effect on peritoneal fluid cytology in all patients, such as age, histologic type, grade, myometrial invasion, cervical invasion, tumor size, and lymphatic metastasis, were analyzed. RESULTS We observed peritoneal cytology, grade, myometrial invasion, cervical stromal invasion, tumor size, and lymphatic metastasis to have a significant effect on survival. Cytology was positive in 20 of 224 patients (8.9%). Statistical analysis revealed a significant effect on PPC occurrence of myometrial invasion, cervical stromal invasion, tumor size, histologic type, and lymphatic metastasis. CONCLUSIONS Positive peritoneal cytology has a significant effect on survival in endometrial cancer. Positive peritoneal cytology occurrence is influenced by myometrial invasion, cervical stromal invasion, tumor size, histologic type, and lymphatic metastasis.
Collapse
|