Adjuvant therapy in stage III endometrial cancer confined to the pelvis

2009 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage IIIA endometrial cancer: oncologic outcomes based on involvement of adnexa, serosa, or both

OBJECTIVE

To assess clinicopathologic features and survival outcomes of patients with endometrial carcinoma involving adnexal, full-thickness serosal, or combined involvement.

METHODS

This international, multi-institutional, retrospective study examined patients with 2009 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage IIIA endometrial cancer and tumors involving the uterine serosa and/or adnexa, who were surgically staged between 2000 and 2019. Patients with sarcoma histology, concurrent endometrial/ovarian malignancy, neoadjuvant treatment, positive lymph nodes, or peritoneal disease were excluded.

RESULTS

Of 185 patients identified, 139 had tumors with adnexal-only, 40 with serosal-only, and six with combined adnexal/serosal involvement. Median age at diagnosis was 60 years (range 23-89). Among tumors of endometrioid histology, 12 (48%) with serosal-only and 17 (19%) with adnexal-only involvement were FIGO grade 3 (p=0.007). Twenty-three tumors with serosal-only (64%) and 50 with adnexal-only (37%) involvement had lymphovascular invasion (p=0.004). Non-endometrioid histology was present in five tumors (83%) with combined adnexal/serosal, 15 (38%) with serosal-only, and 50 (36%) with adnexal-only involvement.Median follow-up was 77 months (range 0.6-254). Five-year progression-free survival and overall survival rates for all patients with stage IIIA disease were 73.8% (SE 3.5%) and 81.0% (SE 3.1%), respectively. For patients with adnexal-only, serosal-only, and combined adnexal/serosal involvement, 5-year progression-free survival rates were 80% (SE 3.8%), 61% (SE 8.3%), and 33% (SE 19.2%), respectively (p<0.01); 5-year overall survival rates were 85% (SE 3.3%), 70% (SE 7.8%), and 60% (SE 21.9%), respectively (p=0.09). On univariate analysis, tumors having serosal involvement with/without adnexal involvement, non-endometrioid histology, and lymphovascular invasion were significantly associated with progression. On multivariate analysis, tumors having serosal involvement with/without adnexal involvement remained significantly associated with recurrence (adjusted HR=2.2, 95% CI 1.2 to 4.3; p=0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with 2009 FIGO stage IIIA endometrial cancer have distinct survival outcomes depending upon adnexal and/or serosal involvement. Progression-free survival was worse for patients with serosal involvement after adjusting for histology, adjuvant treatment, and lymphovascular space invasion.

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&lt;0.00001) and OS (61.9 vs 25.7m, p&lt;0.00001) compared to no RT. Likewise, use of adjuvant CT was also associated with improved DFS (54.8 vs 16.5m, p&lt;0.00001) and OS (62.9 vs 26.5m, p&lt;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 &gt;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.

Management of Patients Diagnosed with Endometrial Cancer: Comparison of Guidelines

Endometrial cancer is the most common gynecological malignancy in Europe and its management involves a variety of health professionals. In recent years, big discoveries were made concerning the management of patients diagnosed with endometrial cancer, particularly in the field of molecular biology and minimally invasive surgery. This requires the continuous updating of guidelines and protocols over the years. In this paper, we aim to summarize and compare common points and disparities among protocols for management of patients diagnosed with endometrial cancer by leading international gynecological oncological societies. We therefore systematically report the parallel among the guidelines based on the various steps patients with endometrial cancer usually undergo. The comparison between American and European protocols revealed some relevant disparities, in particular regarding surgical staging, molecular biology application as a prognostic tool and follow up regimens. This could possibly cause differences in interpreting and applying protocols in clinical practice in small centers, leading to a lack of adherence to guidelines or even prompting a confusing mix of them.

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.

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.

Practice patterns and survival in FIGO 2009 stage 3B endometrial cancer

OBJECTIVE

To describe the practice patterns and outcomes of patients with stage 3B endometrial cancer.

METHODS

We queried the National Cancer Database for all surgically staged, stage 3 patients between 2012 and 2016. Patients who received any pre-operative therapy were excluded. Demographics, tumor factors, and adjuvant therapy for the stage 3 substages were compared. Logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with adjuvant therapy. Kaplan Meier curves were generated and compared using the log-rank test. Multivariable Cox Proportional Hazards Model was used to adjust for prognostic factors. Findings with p < 0.05 were considered significant.

RESULTS

Of 7363 patients with stage 3 disease, 478 (6%) had stage 3B; 1732 (23%) had stage 3A, 3457 (48%) had stage 3C1, and 1696 (23%) had stage 3C2 disease. Post-surgical treatment consisted of: combined chemotherapy (CT) and radiation (RT) (49%), CT alone (28%), RT alone (9%), 14% received no postoperative therapy. Among all stage 3 substages, patients with stage 3B disease were the least likely to receive any CT, and the most likely to receive RT alone. After adjusting for known prognostic factors, patients with stage 3A (Hazard ratio (HR) of death = 0.64) and 3C1 (HR of death = 0.79) disease had significantly worse overall survival compared to stage 3B; survival was not demonstrably different from patients with stage 3C2 disease. Patients with stage 3B disease who received CT + RT had the best overall survival.

CONCLUSION

Survival of patients with stage 3B disease is similar to that of patients with para-aortic node metastases and is inferior to all others with stage 3 endometrial cancer. Less frequent CT and a higher rate of post-operative RT alone, describes a distinct practice from that seen in other stage 3 patients.

Evaluation of the optimal sequence of adjuvant chemotherapy and radiation therapy in the treatment of advanced endometrial cancer

OBJECTIVE

The optimal sequence of adjuvant chemoradiation in the treatment of advanced endometrial carcinoma (EC) remains unclear. We sought to evaluate the outcomes of patients treated with chemoradiation in sandwich fashion (chemotherapy-radiotherapy-chemotherapy; CRC), versus those treated sequentially (chemotherapy-radiotherapy; CR) (radiotherapy-chemotherapy; RC), to determine if there is a survival advantaged associated with a particular treatment sequence.

METHODS

A multicenter retrospective analysis of patients with stage III and IV EC from 2000-2018 was conducted. Inclusion criteria were patients who had undergone comprehensive surgical staging/tumor debulking; followed by adjuvant chemoradiation. Differences in the frequencies of adverse events were evaluated using Pearson's χ² test. Progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) rates were calculated using Kaplan-Meier estimates.

RESULTS

Final analysis included 152 patients; 36.8% (n=56) CRC, 28.9% (n=44) CR, and 34.2% (n=52) RC. Histology included 44.0% endometrioid, 47.5% serous and 8.5% clear cell tumors. There was no difference in the frequency of histology (p=0.973), stage (p=0.143), cytoreduction status (p=0.932), or treatment delays (p=0.571) between adjuvant therapy sequences. The most frequent location of disease recurrence was abdomen. The median PFS favored CRC versus CR or RC (36-months vs. 22-months and 24-months, respectively) (p=0.038), as did the median OS (48-months vs. 28-months and 34-months, respectively) (p=0.003). CRC demonstrated superiority over CR and RC sequencing in terms 3-year PFS (55% vs. 34% and 37%, respectively) and 3-year OS (71% vs. 50% and 52%, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Adjuvant chemoradiation delivered in CRC sequence was associated with improvements in both PFS and OS compared to alternant therapy sequencing.

Evaluation of Survival, Recurrence Patterns and Adjuvant Therapy in Surgically Staged High-Grade Endometrial Cancer with Retroperitoneal Metastases

BACKGROUND

We seek to evaluate the difference in recurrence patterns and survival among stage IIIC high-grade endometrial cancer treated with surgery followed by adjuvant chemotherapy alone, radiation therapy alone, or both (chemoradiation).

METHODS

A multicenter retrospective analysis of surgically staged IIIC HGEC receiving adjuvant therapy was conducted. HGEC was defined as grade 3 endometrioid adenocarcinoma, serous, clear cell and carcinosarcoma. Differences in the frequency of recurrence sites and treatment delays were identified using Pearson's χ² test. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were calculated using Kaplan-Meier estimates.

RESULTS

A total of 155 patients were evaluable: 41.9% carcinosarcoma, 36.8% serous, 17.4% grade 3 and 3.9% clear cell. Of these, 67.1% received chemoradiation, 25.8% received chemotherapy and 7.1% received radiation therapy. There was no difference in the frequency of treatment delays between regimens (p = 0.571). There was a trend towards greater retroperitoneal recurrence with chemotherapy (25.9%) versus chemoradiation (8.4%) and radiation therapy (7.7%) (p = 0.252). Grade 3 tumors had improved progression-free and overall survival (26 and 42 months, respectively) versus serous (17 and 30 months, respectively), carcinosarcoma (14 and 24 months, respectively) and clear cell (24 and 30 months respectively) (p = 0.002, p < 0.001). Overall, chemoradiation was superior to chemotherapy and radiation therapy in PFS (p < 0.001) and OS (p < 0.001). Upon multivariate analysis, only histology and receipt of chemoradiation were independent predictors of survival.

CONCLUSION

The majority of stage IIIC high-grade endometrial carcinomas recurred. Chemoradiation was associated with improved survival and less retroperitoneal recurrence. Grade 3 tumors demonstrated improved survival versus other histologies regardless of adjuvant treatment modality.

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.

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.