Chemoradiation versus chemotherapy or radiation alone in stage III endometrial cancer: Patterns of care and impact on overall survival

Comparing the survival rates of patients with stage IIIC endometrial cancer undergoing sandwich therapy to those undergoing sequential chemotherapy and radiotherapy: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The use of additional treatment after surgery for stage IIIC endometrial cancer (EC) according to the Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) is still a topic of discussion. This meta-analysis examined the effects of sandwich treatment and sequential treatment on the survival of individuals diagnosed with stage IIIC EC.

METHODS

We examined the literature from various databases regarding the overall survival (OS) and adverse effects of the two additional therapies following surgery in individuals diagnosed with stage IIIC EC. Revman 5.4.1 was utilized to combine hazard ratios (HR) and their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for OS and toxicities.

RESULTS

The findings comprised of five retrospective investigations involving a combined total of 800 individuals. The patients who underwent sandwich treatment did not demonstrate a notable improvement in survival rates over a period of 3 years. Upon eliminating the impact of extensive samples, it was discovered that sandwich therapy exhibited a superior 5-year overall survival compared to patients receiving sequential therapy. The effectiveness of sandwich therapy was superior to sequential therapy in terms of a 3-year OS for non-endometrioid histology, although the outcome did not reach statistical significance. The toxicities of both treatments were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

In terms of long-term survival, sandwich therapy was found to be more advantageous than sequential therapy for patients with stage IIIC EC, with no significant disparity observed in the 3-year OS and toxicities between the two treatments. Sandwich therapy exhibited a tendency towards improved effectiveness in patients with histology other than endometrioid.

Impact of the adjuvant management and risk factors on survival in FIGO stage 3 endometrial cancer patients

Objective

Patients with FIGO stage III endometrial cancer routinely receive adjuvant therapy. The purpose of this study was to evaluate overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) in patients with stage IIIA to IIIC2 patients by treatment modality received and risk factors.

Materials/methods

Patients with stage III endometrial cancer treated from 2000-2010 were identified in the provincial cancer registry. Clinicopathologic characteristics, adjuvant treatments and outcomes were compared using descriptive and multivariable analyses.

Results

261 patients had stage 3 endometrial cancer, 132 with stage IIIA, 9 with IIIB, 85 with IIIC1 and 35 with IIIC2. 39 had FIGO grade 1 disease; 73, grade 2; 147, grade 3. 160 had endometrioid and 35 had serous carcinoma. 161 patients received sequential adjuvant chemotherapy (CT) and radiotherapy (RT); 33 received RT only; 32 received CT only; 35 received neither. 5-year (5Y) DFS and OS were similar among stage IIIA (DFS 46.7%, OS 58.5%), IIIB (DFS 50.8%, OS 58.5%), IIIC1 (DFS 44%, OS 49.9%) and IIIC2 (DFS 42%, OS 41.6%). Use of adjuvant RT was associated with improved median DFS (53.7 vs 14.7m, p<0.00001) and OS (61.9 vs 25.7m, p<0.00001) compared to no RT. Likewise, use of adjuvant CT was also associated with improved DFS (54.8 vs 16.5m, p<0.00001) and OS (62.9 vs 26.5m, p<0.00001) compared to no CT. Those who received both chemotherapy and radiotherapy had better outcomes with 5-year DFS (58.3%) and OS (65.2%), compared with those who received monotherapy. On multivariate analysis, grade 3 disease, deep myometrial invasion >50%, and no adjuvant RT or CT were identified as adversely impacting DFS and OS.

Conclusion

In stage III endometrial cancer patients, use of both chemotherapy and radiation therapy was associated with improved DFS and OS and therefore should be recommended in all eligible patients after resection.

Adjuvant chemoradiotherapy versus chemotherapy or radiotherapy in advanced endometrial cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Endometrial cancer is one of the most common gynecological cancer in the world. However, the available adjuvant therapies, chemotherapy (CT) and radiotherapy (RT), demonstrated several limitations when used alone. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis to investigate the clinical effectiveness of chemoradiotherapy (CRT) based on overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS).

Methods

A literature search was performed on five databases and one clinical trial registry to obtain all relevant articles. Search for studies was completed on September 9, 2021. A meta-analysis was conducted to determine the overall hazard ratio with the 95% Confidence Interval.

Results

A total of 17 articles with 23,975 patients in the CRT vs RT group and 50,502 patients in the CRT vs CT group were included. The OS Hazard Ratios (HR) of CRT compared to RT was 0.66 (95% CI [0.59-0.75]; P < 0.00001). Compared to CT, the OS HR was 0.70 (95% CI [0.64-0.78]; P < 0.00001). CRT also significantly improved the DFS compared to CT only (HR 0.79, 95% CI [0.64-0.97]; P = 0.02) However, CRT did not improve the DFS compared to RT only, with HR of 0.71 (95% CI [0.46-1.09]; P = 0.12).

Conclusion

Adjuvant CRT can significantly improve OS compared to CT or RT alone and improve the DFS compared to CT alone in patients with advanced endometrial cancer. Further research is needed to identify the optimal CRT regimen, and to whom CRT will be most beneficial.

Addition of External Beam Radiation Therapy to Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Patients With Stage IIIC Uterine Endometrioid Carcinoma: Utilization and Outcomes

OBJECTIVES

Evaluate whether the addition of external beam radiation (EBRT) to adjuvant chemotherapy with or without vaginal brachytherapy is associated with better survival for patients with stage IIIC endometrioid endometrial carcinoma.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients diagnosed between 2010 and 2015 with apparent early-stage endometrioid adenocarcinoma, without a history of another tumor, who underwent hysterectomy with lymphadenectomy and had positive lymph nodes were identified in the National Cancer Database. Those who received adjuvant chemotherapy (defined as receipt of treatment within 6 mo from surgery) and had at least 1 month of follow-up were selected for further analysis. Overall survival was compared between patients who did and did not receive EBRT within 6 months from surgery with the log-rank test. A Cox model was also constructed to control for confounders.

RESULTS

A total of 3116 patients were identified; 1458 (46.8%) received chemotherapy without and 1658 (53.2%) with EBRT. Pathologic characteristics (tumor grade, size, endocervical, and lymph-vascular invasion) were comparable between the two groups. Patients who received external beam radiation had better survival compared with those who did not, P =0.001; 5-year overall survival rates were 83.1% and 77.9%, respectively. After controlling for patient age, race, presence of comorbidities, insurance status, tumor size, grade and endocervical invasion, and the presence of lymph-vascular invasion, the addition of EBRT was associated with a survival benefit (HR: 0.75, 95% CI: 0.62, 0.91).

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with endometrioid adenocarcinoma metastatic to the lymph nodes, addition of external beam radiation to adjuvant chemotherapy may be associated with a survival benefit.

Adjuvant chemoradiotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in stage III endometrial cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To discuss the impact of chemoradiotherapy (CRT) on the survival of patients with stage III endometrial cancer (EC) compared with chemotherapy (CT) alone.

METHODS

Articles involving adjuvant CRT versus CT on survival in stage III EC were retrieved from PubMed and EMBASE. Hazard ratios (HRs) of overall survival (OS) and relapse-free survival (RFS) were collected and pooled, and publication bias was measured by Begg's and Egger's test. Quality of researches was measured by the Newcastle-Ottawa scale and the modified Jadad scale.

RESULTS

Eleven were included in the statistical analysis. A significant advantage of CRT over CT on OS was shown (HR 0.59, 95% CI 0.49-0.70). Further subgroup analysis suggested the advantage was mostly associated with stage IIIC (HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.52, 0.76]). A similar result favoring CRT was also reached on RFS (HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.47-0.93). No significant publication bias was observed.

CONCLUSION

CRT was associated with a better OS and RFS than CT alone in stage III EC patients.

Management of inoperable endometrial cancer

Some endometrial cancer (EMC) patients are not good candidates for primary surgery. The three major types of treatment for inoperable EMC are radiation therapy, chemotherapy, or their combination as neoadjuvant treatment before surgery. Radiation therapy alone (of different modes) has been used as the sole definitive therapeutic modality, particularly for early-stage disease that is limited to the uterine body and cervix with or without parametrial invasion. The most common treatment modality is neoadjuvant treatment before surgery. Postoperative adjuvant treatment is also occasionally used, depending mainly on the sites of the disease and the results of surgery. Data on neoadjuvant hormonal or radiation therapy are limited, with studies focusing on laboratory outcomes or having only a small number of patients. Most neoadjuvant treatments before surgery involved chemotherapy and fewer combined chemoradiotherapy. Surgery was generally performed, particularly in patients who had shown responses or at least stable disease to neoadjuvant treatment. Perioperative outcomes after neoadjuvant treatment were superior to those after primary surgery, whereas survival data were still inconsistent. Features that had or tended to have a favorable prognosis were younger age, early-stage disease, response to neoadjuvant treatment, low preoperative cancer antigen-125 level, and optimal surgery. Among different modalities of neoadjuvant treatment, which has become a frequent mode of treatment, neoadjuvant chemotherapy was more common than radiation therapy alone or chemoradiation.

Adjuvant treatment and outcomes for patients with stage IIIA grade 1 endometrioid endometrial cancer

OBJECTIVE

The role and type of adjuvant therapy for patients with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage IIIA grade 1 endometrioid endometrial adenocarcinoma are controversial. This retrospective cohort study aimed to determine associations between adjuvant therapy use and survival among patients with stage IIIA grade 1 endometrial cancer.

METHODS

Patients who underwent primary surgery for stage IIIA (FIGO 2009 staging) grade 1 endometrial cancer between January 2004 and December 2016 were identified in the National Cancer Database. Demographics and receipt of adjuvant therapy were compared. Overall survival was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier curves, log-rank test, and multivariable Cox proportional hazard models.

RESULTS

Of 1120 patients, 248 (22.1%) received no adjuvant treatment, 286 (25.5%) received chemotherapy alone, 201 (18.0%) radiation alone, and 385 (34.4%) chemotherapy and radiation. Five-year overall survival rate was 83.0% (95% CI 80.1% to 85.6%). Older age, increasing comorbidity count, and lymphovascular space invasion status were significant negative predictors of survival. Over time, there was an increasing rate of chemotherapy (45.4% in 2004-2009 vs 69.2% in 2010-2016; p<0.001). In the multivariable analysis, chemotherapy was associated with significantly improved overall survival compared with no adjuvant therapy (HR 0.49 (95% CI 0.31 to 0.79); p=0.003). There was no survival association when comparing radiation alone with no treatment, and none when adding radiation to chemotherapy compared with chemotherapy alone. Those with lymphovascular space invasion (n=124/507) had improved overall survival with chemotherapy and radiation (5-year overall survival 91.2% vs 76.7% for chemotherapy alone and 27.3% for radiation alone, log-rank p<0.001), but there was no survival difference after adjusting for age and comorbidity (HR 0.25 (95% CI 0.05 to 1.41); p=0.12).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of adjuvant chemotherapy for the treatment of stage IIIA grade 1 endometrial cancer increased over time and was associated with improved overall survival compared with radiation alone or chemoradiation. Patients with lymphovascular space invasion may benefit from combination therapy.

Impact of lymph node ratio in patients with stage IIIC endometrial carcinoma treated with postoperative radiotherapy

Aim: To evaluate the prognostic value of the lymph node ratio (LNR) and other clinicopathological factors in patients with stage IIIC endometrial cancer. Methods: Factors affecting overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were assessed in 397 patients with stage IIIC endometrial cancer treated with postoperative radiotherapy. Patients undergoing the removal of at least ten lymph nodes were included in the study. Results: The 5-year OS and PFS rates were 58% and 52%, respectively, with a median follow-up time of 35.7 months. The LNR cutoff value was 9.6%. In the multivariate analysis, advanced age (≥60 years), grade III tumor, presence of cervical stromal invasion, higher LNR and lack of adjuvant chemotherapy were independent predictors for worse OS and PFS. Conclusion: The LNR is an independent predictor for OS and PFS in patients with stage IIIC endometrial cancer treated with postoperative radiotherapy.

Stage IIIC endometrial cancer review: Current controversies in adjuvant therapy

Stage IIIC is the most common stage of locally advanced sub-stage of endometrial cancer, nevertheless, the optimal management for these patients remains controversial. Adjuvant chemotherapy alone more effectively suppressed distant metastases but resulted in a higher rate of pelvic failure, while adjuvant radiation more effectively controlled pelvic recurrences but was associated with more frequent distant metastases. Two recent randomized trials, PORTEC3 and GOG 258, each have attempted to integrate multimodal therapy. However, heterogeneous cohorts analyzed together, including high risk stage I, stage III and stage IV, limit our ability to make conclusions specific to stage IIIC disease. Here, we review clinical evidence pertaining to management and outcomes with stage IIIC uterine carcinoma with brief discussion on evolving approaches. The studies reviewed demonstrate for stage IIIC disease radiation improves local control but does not confer an overall survival benefit and chemotherapy can improve overall survival. The data seem to suggest that aside from the possibility of defining subgroups that may confer an overall survival benefit from combined modality therapy, the future to improving survival lies in the exploration of better therapeutic regimens that will result from tailored biomarker-based therapy.

ESGO/ESTRO/ESP guidelines for the management of patients with endometrial carcinoma

A European consensus conference on endometrial carcinoma was held in 2014 to produce multidisciplinary evidence-based guidelines on selected questions. Given the large body of literature on the management of endometrial carcinoma published since 2014, the European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO), the European SocieTy for Radiotherapy & Oncology (ESTRO) and the European Society of Pathology (ESP) jointly decided to update these evidence-based guidelines and to cover new topics in order to improve the quality of care for women with endometrial carcinoma across Europe and worldwide. ESGO/ESTRO/ESP nominated an international multidisciplinary development group consisting of practicing clinicians and researchers who have demonstrated leadership and expertise in the care and research of endometrial carcinoma (27 experts across Europe). To ensure that the guidelines are evidence-based, the literature published since 2014, identified from a systematic search was reviewed and critically appraised. In the absence of any clear scientific evidence, judgment was based on the professional experience and consensus of the development group. The guidelines are thus based on the best available evidence and expert agreement. Prior to publication, the guidelines were reviewed by 191 independent international practitioners in cancer care delivery and patient representatives. The guidelines comprehensively cover endometrial carcinoma staging, definition of prognostic risk groups integrating molecular markers, pre- and intra-operative work-up, fertility preservation, management for early, advanced, metastatic, and recurrent disease and palliative treatment. Principles of radiotherapy and pathological evaluation are also defined.

ESGO/ESTRO/ESP Guidelines for the management of patients with endometrial carcinoma

A European consensus conference on endometrial carcinoma was held in 2014 to produce multidisciplinary evidence-based guidelines on selected questions. Given the large body of literature on the management of endometrial carcinoma published since 2014, the European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO), the European SocieTy for Radiotherapy & Oncology (ESTRO) and the European Society of Pathology (ESP) jointly decided to update these evidence-based guidelines and to cover new topics in order to improve the quality of care for women with endometrial carcinoma across Europe and worldwide. ESGO/ESTRO/ESP nominated an international multidisciplinary development group consisting of practicing clinicians and researchers who have demonstrated leadership and expertise in the care and research of endometrial carcinoma (27 experts across Europe). To ensure that the guidelines are evidence-based, the literature published since 2014, identified from a systematic search was reviewed and critically appraised. In the absence of any clear scientific evidence, judgment was based on the professional experience and consensus of the development group. The guidelines are thus based on the best available evidence and expert agreement. Prior to publication, the guidelines were reviewed by 191 independent international practitioners in cancer care delivery and patient representatives. The guidelines comprehensively cover endometrial carcinoma staging, definition of prognostic risk groups integrating molecular markers, pre- and intra-operative work-up, fertility preservation, management for early, advanced, metastatic, and recurrent disease and palliative treatment. Principles of radiotherapy and pathological evaluation are also defined.

Radiotherapy and Its Intersections with Surgery in the Management of Localized Gynecological Malignancies: A Comprehensive Overview for Clinicians

Surgery, including minimally invasive surgery, and radiotherapy are key modalities in the treatment of gynecological malignancies. The aim of this review is to offer the multidisciplinary care team a comprehensive summary of the intersections of surgery and radiotherapy in the local treatment of gynecological malignancies. Recent advances in radiotherapy are highlighted. Relevant publications were identified through a review of the published literature. Ovarian, endometrial, cervical, vaginal, and vulvar cancer were included in the search. Current guidelines are summarized. The role of radiotherapy in adjuvant as well as definitive treatment of these entities is synthesized and put into context with surgery, focusing on survival and quality of life. Although these outcomes have improved recently, further research must be focused on the number of life years lost, and the potential morbidity encountered by patients.

ESGO/ESTRO/ESP guidelines for the management of patients with endometrial carcinoma

A European consensus conference on endometrial carcinoma was held in 2014 to produce multi-disciplinary evidence-based guidelines on selected questions. Given the large body of literature on the management of endometrial carcinoma published since 2014, the European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO), the European SocieTy for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO), and the European Society of Pathology (ESP) jointly decided to update these evidence-based guidelines and to cover new topics in order to improve the quality of care for women with endometrial carcinoma across Europe and worldwide.

Adjuvant radiation followed by chemotherapy is associated with improved overall survival in endometrial cancer

OBJECTIVE

Although multimodality therapy has been shown to improve outcomes for patients with high-risk endometrial carcinoma, optimal type and timing of adjuvant therapies is unknown.

METHODS

Patients with stage I-IVA endometrial carcinoma diagnosed from 2004 to 2015, and treated with surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation were identified in the National Cancer Database. Adjuvant treatment was categorized as sequential radiation followed by chemotherapy (RT-CT), concurrent chemoradiation (CCRT, RT and CT started within 7 days), or sequential chemotherapy followed by radiation (CT-RT). Analysis for propensity score matched (PSM) cohorts comparing RT-CT to CCRT and CT-RT groups was additionally performed.

RESULTS

A total of 17,070 patients were identified, including 12,402 (72.7%) treated with RT-CT, 2,153 (12.6%) with CCRT, and 2,515 (14.7%) with CT-RT. Median follow-up was 44.3 months. Five-year overall-survival (OS) by adjuvant treatment regimen was 77.3% (95% CI 76.4%-78.2%), 74.3% (95% CI 72.0%-76.3%), and 74.4% (95% CI 72.5%-76.3%), respectively (p < .001). When unmatched cohorts were stratified by stage, adjuvant RT-CT was associated with improved OS in stage I and III patients. A similar survival advantage associated with RT-CT was observed in PSM cohorts comparing RT-CT group to CCRT/CT-RT group (5-year OS 77.4% vs 74.2%, p = .001). However, the difference in OS was significant only among stage III patients (RT-CT 73.9% compared to CCRT/CT-RT 69.7%, p =.002).

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest survival benefit with adjuvant RT-CT compared to CT-RT or CCRT in patients undergoing trimodality therapy for endometrial cancer. This survival benefit may be limited to stage III patients.

A multi-institutional analysis of sequential versus 'sandwich' adjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy for stage IIIC endometrial carcinoma

Objective

To analyze the outcomes of sequential or sandwich chemotherapy (ChT) and radiotherapy (RT) in patients with node-positive endometrial cancer (EC).

Methods

Data from 4 centers were collected retrospectively for 179 patients with stage IIIC EC treated with postoperative RT and ChT (paclitaxel and carboplatin). Patients were either treated with 6 cycles of ChT followed by RT (sequential arm; 96 patients) or with 3 cycles of ChT, RT, and an additional 3 cycles of ChT (sandwich arm; 83 patients). Prognostic factors affecting overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were analyzed.

Results

The 5-year OS and PFS rates were 64% and 59%, respectively, with a median follow-up of 41 months (range, 5–167 months). The 5-year OS rates were significantly higher in the sandwich than sequential arms (74% vs. 56%; p=0.03) and the difference for 5-year PFS rates was nearly significant (65% vs. 54%; p=0.05). In univariate analysis, treatment strategy, age, International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage, pathology, rate of myometrial invasion, and grade were prognostic factors for OS and PFS. In multivariate analysis, non-endometrioid histology, advanced FIGO stage, and adjuvant sequential ChT and RT were negative predictors for OS, whereas only non-endometrioid histology was a prognostic factor for PFS.

Conclusion

Postoperative adjuvant ChT and RT for stage IIIC EC patients, either given sequentially or sandwiched, offers excellent clinical efficacy and acceptably low toxicity. Our data support the superiority of the sandwich regimen compared to the sequential strategy in stage IIIC EC patients for OS.

Is there any benefit of paraaortic field irradiation in pelvic lymph node positive endometrial cancer patients? A propensity match analysis

We evaluated the survival outcomes and recurrence patterns of endometrial cancer (EC) patients with pelvic lymph node metastases who received postoperative radiotherapy (RT) to the pelvis (P-RT) or to the pelvis plus paraaortic lymph nodes (PA-RT) with or without systemic chemotherapy (ChT). The data from 167 patients with stage IIIC1 EC treated with postoperative RT or RT and ChT were collected retrospectively. Those patients with pelvic lymph node metastases were treated with either P-RT (106 patients, 63%) or PA-RT (61 patients, 37%). The median follow-up time for the entire cohort was 49 (range = 5-199) months. The patients receiving adjuvant ChT and RT had significantly higher 5-year OS rates (77% vs. 33%, p < .001) and 5-year PFS rates (71% vs. 30%, p < .001) when compared to those receiving adjuvant RT alone. The patients receiving P-RT and ChT had significantly higher 5-year OS rates and 5-year PFS rates when compared to those treated with adjuvant PA-RT in the entire cohort and matched cohort. Adjuvant ChT together with RT is the strongest predictor of the OS and PFS. Prophylactic PA-RT is unnecessary, even if ChT is used together with P-RT in EC patients with pelvic lymph node metastasis.Impact statementWhat is already known on this subject? Local and distant recurrence risks are relatively higher in patients with stage IIIC disease, postoperative adjuvant treatment is required to reduce the recurrence risk. Adjuvant RT is a common approach for patients with locally advanced EC. Optimal target volume for RT in patients with stage IIIC EC remains controversial. We demonstrated that extended field RT is unnecessary, even if ChT is used together with pelvic RT in stage IIIC EC patients.What do the results of this study add? We demonstrated that adjuvant ChT together with RT is the strongest predictor of the OS and PFS for EC patients with pelvic lymph node metastases. Extended field RT is unnecessary, even if ChT is used together with pelvic RT in EC patients with pelvic lymph node metastases.What are the implications of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? Although adjuvant treatment modalities are associated with improvements in survival, distant metastasis still remains the most common site of recurrence in advanced EC patients. Thus, further research is warranted to identify improved combined modality strategies to optimise the outcomes for EC patients with pelvic lymph node metastasis.

Adjuvant External Radiation Impacts Outcome of Pelvis-limited Stage III Endometrial Carcinoma: A Multi-institutional Study

BACKGROUND

Adjuvant therapy choice for women with FIGO stage III endometrial carcinoma (EC) is controversial. We investigate the comparative benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy (CT) alone, radiation therapy alone (RT) or in combination (chemotherapy and radiation therapy [CRT]) with respect to recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) in women with pelvis-limited (PL) EC (stage IIIA, IIIB, and IIIC1).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A multi-institutional database of 270 surgically staged women with PLEC was analyzed. Univariate log-rank analyses and Cox regression multivariate analyses (MVA) were performed to identify factors associated with RFS and OS.

RESULTS

Median RFS and OS were 112 and 130 months, respectively, for the full cohort. Adjuvant treatment was CT in 21%, RT in 27%, and CRT in 47%. Age, year of treatment, grade, histology, and adjuvant treatment were significantly associated with RFS and OS on univariate analysis. PLEC patients receiving CT alone fared worse in terms of RFS (P=0.07 relative to RT and <0.01 relative to CRT). On MVA, CRT retained significantly improved RFS relative to CT (hazard ratio for recurrence 0.38, P<0.01). PLEC patients receiving RT or CRT had improved OS compared with CT, P<0.01 and 0.03, respectively. On MVA, both RT only and CRT retained association with improved OS relative to CT alone (hazard ratio for death, 0.43, P=0.02 and 0.40, P<0.01, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

For surgically staged PL stage III EC, treatment regimens incorporating RT were associated with improved survival endpoints relative to CT alone. As such, RT should be considered an important component in the adjuvant management of stage III PLEC.

An optical study of drug resistance detection in endometrial cancer cells by dynamic and quantitative phase imaging

Platinum chemosensitivity detection plays a vital role during endometrial cancer treatment because chemotherapy responses have profound influences on patient's prognosis. Although several methods can be used to detect drug resistance characteristics, studies on detecting drug sensitivity based on dynamic and quantitative phase imaging of cancer cells are rare. In this study, digital holographic microscopy was applied to distinguish drug-resistant and nondrug-resistant endometrial cancer cells. Based on the reconstructed phase images, temporal evolutions of cell height (CH), cell projected area (CPA) and cell volume were quantitatively measured. The results show that change rates of CH and CPA were significantly different between drug-resistant and nondrug-resistant endometrial cancer cells. Furthermore, the results demonstrate that morphological characteristics have the potential to be utilized to distinguish the drug sensitivity of endometrial cancer cells, and it may provide new perspectives to establish optical methods to detect drug sensitivity and guide chemotherapy in endometrial cancer.

Adjuvant therapy in stage III endometrial cancer confined to the pelvis

OBJECTIVE

To review outcomes of patients with stage III endometrial cancer confined to the pelvis treated with adjuvant pelvic radiotherapy (RT) or sequential chemoradiotherapy (CRT).

METHODS

Between 1990 and 2012, 144 patients diagnosed with stage IIIA, B or C1 endometrial cancer were treated in our institution. All were treated with total hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy ± lymph node dissection. Post-operatively, 67 patients received adjuvant RT alone, 37 CRT, 21 chemotherapy alone and 19 had no adjuvant therapy. This analysis focuses on the 104 patients treated with RT or CRT.

RESULTS

The median follow-up was 61 months. Forty-six patients (44%) were stage IIIA, 6 (6%) were stage IIIB and 52 (50%) stage IIIC1. The 5-year overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) for patients treated by RT alone vs. CRT were, respectively, 67% vs. 61% (p = 0.55); 67% vs. 51% (p = 0.35); and 76% vs. 65% (p = 0.21). Grade 3 disease was an independent predictor for worse OS (HR = 6.01, p = 0.001), DFS (HR = 3.16, p = 0.03), and DSS (HR = 3.77, p = 0.02). In patients with grade 3 disease (n = 49), the 5-year OS was superior for the CRT (42% vs. 56%, p = 0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with stage III endometrial cancer confined to the pelvis, the addition of adjuvant chemotherapy with RT significantly improved OS in grade 3 disease. Grade 3 histology is a strong predictor for poor outcome. Further randomized studies aiming specifically at stage III disease are warranted.

Evolution of adjuvant treatment in endometrial cancer-no evidence and new questions?

PURPOSE

For endometrial cancer (EC), clinical and pathological risk factors are taken to triage patients and estimate their prognosis. Lymph node involvement (pN+), lymphovascular space involvement (LSVI), grading, age of the patients, and T classification are internationally accepted parameters for treatment decisions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Studies on adjuvant radiation, chemotherapy, and chemoradiation are discussed against the background of risk stratification and clinical decision-making in early-to-advanced stage endometrial cancer. Recent publications on adjuvant treatment in high-risk disease and its implications for the patients with regard to expected oncologic benefit and treatment-related toxicity are discussed.

RESULTS

Surgery is the mainstay of treatment of EC patients. Well-differentiated tumors and early disease (FIGO IA) should be followed up without further treatment. In FIGO I stage without risk factors, VBT remains the standard treatment after surgery. FIGO I, II patients with one or more risk factors (MI ≥ 50%, Grading[G]3, age >60 years, LVSI) benefit from external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) in terms of survival. There are no data of acceptable quality demonstrating that chemotherapy is superior to radiation in locally advanced carcinomas. Therefore, even in locally advanced disease (FIGO III, IV), EBRT remains the standard of care after surgery. EBRT contributes to the very low rate of local relapses and better DFS in these patients and should not be replaced by chemotherapy only. Whether and which subgroups of patients benefit from an additional (concomitant and/or adjuvant) chemotherapy in terms of disease-free survival remains a controversial issue. The recently published PORTEC-3 trial could not create clear evidence. With a high rate of isolated tumors cells and micrometastases in the specimens, the increasing use of unvalidated sentinel concepts in endometrial cancer raises more questions with regard to indications for adjuvant treatment. In the future, integrated genomic characterization of tumors might be helpful for treatment individualization in the adjuvant setting.

Value of combined adjuvant chemotherapy and radiation on survival for stage III uterine cancer: is less radiation equal to more?

Objective

Locally advanced endometrioid adenocarcinoma (LA-EAC) accounts for the majority of deaths for this cancer, yet there is no consensus on adjuvant treatment after surgery. Past studies suggest that combined modality treatment (CMT) may improve outcomes over treatment with chemotherapy (CT) or radiation therapy (RT, either external beam radiotherapy [EBRT] or vaginal brachytherapy [VBT]) alone. Using a large US-based population-based registry, we evaluated adjuvant CMT in LA-EAC and the relative benefit of regional EBRT compared to focused VBT.

Methods

We studied patients diagnosed with Stage III LA-EAC between 2004 and 2013 from the National Cancer Data Base (NCDB). We used Cox regression and a log-rank test to assess survival based on treatment with CT alone, EBRT alone, VBT alone, or CMT with EBRT and/or VBT. We used a χ² test to compare covariates between patients receiving CMT with EBRT or VBT.

Results

Patients who received CMT had better survival than those who received CT or EBRT/VBT alone. Compared to CMT with VBT, patients who received CMT with EBRT were slightly older and had more advanced-stage or positive nodes, and fewer had lymph node surgery. We found no survival difference between CMT with EBRT and CMT with VBT even when categorizing patients as high or low risk according to age, grade, and stage (low-risk p=0.3460; high-risk p=0.2158).

Conclusion

CMT was associated with superior survival outcomes compared to monotherapy. We observed no survival difference between radiation modalities in CMT, which highlights the effectiveness of a more focused treatment like brachytherapy.

Brachytherapy Improves Survival in Stage III Endometrial Cancer With Cervical Involvement

PURPOSE

To evaluate the survival benefit of adding vaginal brachytherapy (BT) to pelvic external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) in women with stage III endometrial cancer.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

The National Cancer Data Base was used to identify patients with stage III endometrial cancer from 2004 to 2013. Only women who received adjuvant EBRT were analyzed. Women were grouped according to receipt of BT. Logistic regression modeling was used to identify predictors of receiving BT. Log-rank statistics were used to compare survival outcomes. Cox proportional hazards modeling was used to evaluate the effect of BT on survival. A propensity score-matched analysis was also conducted among women with cervical involvement.

RESULTS

We evaluated 12,988 patients with stage III endometrial carcinoma, 39% of whom received EBRT plus BT. Women who received BT were more likely to have endocervical or cervical stromal involvement (odds ratios 2.03 and 1.77; P<.01, respectively). For patients receiving EBRT alone, the 5-year survival was 66% versus 69% with the addition of BT at 5 years (P<.01). Brachytherapy remained significantly predictive of decreased risk of death (hazard ratio 0.86; P<.01) on multivariate Cox regression. The addition of BT to EBRT did not affect survival among women without cervical involvement (P=.84). For women with endocervical or cervical stromal invasion, the addition of BT significantly improved survival (log-rank P<.01). Receipt of EBRT plus BT was associated with improved survival in women with positive and negative surgical margins, and receiving chemotherapy did not alter the benefit of BT. Propensity score-matched analysis results confirmed the benefit of BT among women with cervical involvement (hazard ratio 0.80; P=.01).

CONCLUSIONS

In this population of women with stage III endometrial cancer the addition of BT to EBRT was associated with an improvement in survival for women with endocervical or cervical stromal invasion.