Type III radical hysterectomy after induction chemotherapy for patients with locally advanced cervical carcinoma

Brachytherapy versus radical hysterectomy after external beam chemoradiation: a non-randomized matched comparison in IB2-IIB cervical cancer patients

Background

A current paradigm in the treatment of cervical cancer with radiation therapy is that intracavitary brachytherapy is an essential component of radical treatment. This is a matched retrospective comparison of the results of treatment in patients treated with external beam chemoradiation (EBRT-CT) and radical hysterectomy versus those treated with identical chemoradiation followed by brachytherapy.

Methods

In this non-randomized comparison EBRT-CT protocol was the same in both groups of 40 patients. In the standard treated patients, EBRT-CT was followed by one or two intracavitary Cesium (low-dose rate) applications within 2 weeks of finishing external radiation to reach a point A dose of at least 85 Gy. In the surgically treated patients, radical hysterectomy with bilateral pelvic lymph node dissection and para-aortic lymph node sampling were performed within 7 weeks after EBRT-CT. Response, toxicity and survival were evaluated.

Results

A total of 80 patients were analyzed. The patients receiving EBRT-CT and surgery were matched with the standard treated cases. There were no differences in the clinicopathological characteristics between groups or in the delivery of EBRT-CT. The pattern of acute and late toxicity differed. Standard treated patients had more chronic proctitis while the surgically treated had acute complications of surgery and hydronephrosis. At a maximum follow-up of 60 months, median follow-up 26 (2–31) and 22 (3–27) months for the surgery and standard therapy respectively, eight patients per group have recurred and died. The progression free and overall survival are the same in both groups.

Conclusion

The results of this study suggest that radical hysterectomy can be used after EBRT-CT without compromising survival in FIGO stage IB2-IIB cervical cancer patients in settings were brachytherapy is not available. A randomized study is needed to uncover the value of surgery after EBRT-CT.

Radiation-sparing managements for cervical cancer: a developing countries perspective

Cervical cancer is the seventh most frequent cancer worldwide but more than 80% of cases occur in developing countries. Till date, radiation therapy with external beam and brachytherapy remains as the core treatment for most stages of cervical cancer. However, radiation treatment protocols and equipment modelled on the best developed countries can be seldom applied directly to developing countries owing to financial constraints and lack of qualified personnel, thus, a substantial proportion of patients do not have access to even palliative radiation therapy. Treatment options when the standard therapy is either not available or difficult to reproduce in particular settings is highly desirable with the potential to save lives that otherwise could be lost by the lack of adequate treatment. These options of treatment ideally had to have show, 1) that these are not inferior to the "standard" in terms of either survival or quality of life; 2) that these can be delivered in settings were the "standard" is not available or if available its quality is poor; and 3) that the treatment option be accepted by the population to be treated.

Based on these considerations, it is obvious that cervical cancer patients, particularly those who live in countries with limited resources and therefore may not have sufficient radiation therapy resources are in need of newer therapeutical options. There is now a considerable amount of information emanating from clinical studies where surgery has a major role in treating this disease. These forms of "radiation-sparing" treatments include total mesometrial resection that could make unnecessary the use of adjuvant radiation; neoadjuvant chemotherapy that could avoid the use of adjuvant radiation in around 85% of patients and preoperative chemoradiation that could make brachytherapy dispensable. The feasibility and therapeutical value of these potential forms of management need to be prospectively evaluated.

Surgery after concurrent chemoradiotherapy and brachytherapy for the treatment of advanced cervical cancer: morbidity and outcome: results of a multicenter study of the GCCLCC (Groupe des Chirurgiens de Centre de Lutte Contre le Cancer)

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the morbidity and therapeutic value of surgery after concurrent chemoradiotherapy and brachytherapy in a multicentric series of patients with advanced cervical cancer.

METHODS

Patients with stage IB2 to IVA cervical cancer treated with concurrent chemoradiotherapy and pelvic radiotherapy followed by brachytherapy and surgery from seven participating French comprehensive cancer centers were enrolled. The surgical treatment consisted of a hysterectomy, which ranged from radical hysterectomy to anterior pelvic exenteration, and lymph node resection. Acute toxicity, pathological response, overall, and disease-free survival were assessed for each pathological response to therapy.

RESULTS

One hundred seventy-five patients were enrolled from September 1987 to June 2002. The median age was 44 years [27;75]. Patients distribution according to clinical classification was as follows: 41 stage IB2, 18 IIA, 77 IIB, 12 IIIA, 14 IIIB, and 13 IVA. Forty-six patients experienced 51 postoperative complications. Thirty-three patients experienced grade 2 morbidity (18.9%, 33/175), among whom 19 experienced urinary complications (57.5%, 19/175). No post treatment mortality was observed. Grade 3 toxicity rate was 6.9% (12/175). Pathological complete response rate was 38% (67/175). After a median follow-up of 36 months, overall survival and disease-free survival were significantly better in patients who had a pathological complete response to therapy than those who achieved a partial pathological response (P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Surgery after concurrent chemoradiotherapy and brachytherapy for advanced cervical cancer leads to an acceptable morbidity. Furthermore, surgery allows evaluation of the pathological response to therapy and improves local control in the case of partial pathological response.

Long-term survival after concomitant chemoradiotherapy prior to surgery in advanced cervical carcinoma

OBJECTIVE

To report the long-term survival of 35 patients who underwent surgery after concomitant chemoradiation for locally advanced cervical cancers.

METHODS

From 1988 to 1992, 20 bulky IB-IIB patients and 15 stage III-IVA patients underwent surgery after concurrent chemotherapy (CDDP and 5-FU) and radiotherapy. 26 had a hysterectomy, 8 had an exenteration, 1 had no tumor resection. 21 had a para-aortic lymphadenectomy. Endpoints were recurrence and distant metastasis rates, overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) at 5 and 10 years. Analysis included FIGO stage, type of surgery (palliative or curative), response to chemoradiation or para-aortic lymphatic status.

RESULTS

Surgery had been only palliative in 6 cases (17.1%). A pelvic control has been achieved in 31 patients (88.6%). Pelvic recurrences occurred after a median interval of 7 months. Distant metastases occurred in 10 patients (28.6%), after a median interval of 20 months. So far, 16 patients have died (45.7%). The 10-year DFS is 56.7% in the whole series. Only the type of surgery significantly affected the OS. Only the para-aortic lymphatic status significantly affected the DFS.

CONCLUSION

Associating chemoradiation with curative surgery, we obtained a 10-year DFS of 66.4% (OS 57.7%). Adjuvant surgery may increase the survival as it reduces the risk of local relapse.

Pathologic response and toxicity assessment of chemoradiotherapy with cisplatin versus cisplatin plus gemcitabine in cervical cancer: A randomized Phase II study

PURPOSE

To compare gemcitabine and cisplatin (GC) with cisplatin (C) concurrent with radiotherapy in International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics Stage IB2, IIA, and IIB cervical carcinoma in a preoperative setting. The main endpoints were the pathologic response rate and toxicity.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A total of 83 patients were randomized to either C or GC. Treatment consisted of six doses of cisplatin at 40 mg/m(2) every week for Arm 1 (C) and six doses of gemcitabine at 125 mg/m(2) plus cisplatin at 40 mg/m(2) every week for or Arm 2 (GC) Both regimens were administered concurrent with 50 Gy of external beam radiotherapy in 2-Gy fractions for 5 weeks. After chemoradiotherapy, patients underwent radical hysterectomy.

RESULTS

All 83 patients were studied for toxicity and 80 for response. The complete pathologic response rate in the C arm and GC arm was 55% (95% confidence interval, 35.5-73%) and 77.5% (95% confidence interval, 57-90%; p = 0.0201). Among those with a partial response, 7 patients each had high and intermediate-high risk factors for recurrence in their surgical specimens in the C arm vs. 2 and 3 patients, respectively, with these characteristics in the CG arm. The number of weekly doses and the dose intensity of GC were lower than for C. The time to complete external beam radiotherapy also favored the C arm. The CG combination produced greater GI and hematologic toxicity.

CONCLUSION

The radiosensitizing combination of GC achieved a greater pathologic response rate than C in the treatment of cervical cancer.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in cervical cancer: a new trend

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Although there is effective screening for cervical cancer, it continues to be a healthcare problem in developing countries. To increase survival rates, different strategies with neoadjuvant chemotherapy have been developed. Nearly all trials that analysed neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus surgery demonstrated an improved outcome, but most phase III trials that compared neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus radiotherapy with radiotherapy alone have failed to show further benefit. Recent data on neoadjuvant chemotherapy could change that assumption, so revision is needed.

RECENT FINDINGS

A meta-analysis by the Medical Research Council (UK) based on individual patient data (2074 patients, median follow-up 5.7 years) showed that there was no benefit of survival in patients treated with radiotherapy. Some interesting results were obtained when the trials were grouped together according to cycle length and dose intensity. Trials that gave more intensive chemotherapy in terms of a shorter cycle or a higher dose intensity tended to show an advantage for neoadjuvant chemotherapy. When analysing neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery, data from meta-analysis showed a reduction in the risk of death of 35% and an absolute gain of 14% in the 5-year survival. The reasons for this could be that short cycle length chemotherapy was used in this subgroup or the surgery may have removed radioresistant cell clones.

SUMMARY

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy may play a role in the treatment of women with cervical cancer. In future, it may be reasonable to compare it with concomitant chemoradiotherapy in terms of efficacy and toxicity.

Modern management of locally advanced cervical carcinoma

Radiation was until recently the key and only modality for the routine treatment of locally advanced cervical carcinoma. However after years of studying multi-modality treatments as an alternative to radiation alone in randomized phase III trials, the standard treatment has changed to chemo-radiation based on cisplatin. Three recent meta-analyses have confirmed that cisplatin-based chemo-radiation adds an absolute 12% benefit in five-year survival over radiation therapy alone. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by radiation has not been of proven benefit, but when neoadjuvant chemotherapy is followed by surgery, an absolute increase of 15% in five-year survival over radiation alone is seen. This benefit in survival is comparable to that obtained with the current chemo-radiation schedules based on cisplatin. Despite these encouraging results there remains room for improvement as the five-year survival of patients treated with chemo-radiation ranges from nearly 80% in bulky IB tumours to only 25% in stage IVA disease. Other therapeutic approaches need to be fully evaluated including the use of chemo-radiation after neoadjuvant chemotherapy; the use of new drug combinations and the multi-modality combination of neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by radical surgery plus adjuvant chemo-radiation. Likewise, the addition of radiosensitizers to cisplatin, preoperative chemo-radiation and/or adjuvant chemotherapy may eventually improve the currents results of cisplatin-based chemo-radiation. Nevertheless, it is hard to foresee a dramatic increase in cure rate, even with the most optimal combination of cytotoxic drugs, surgery and radiation, and thus the testing of molecular targeted therapies against cervical cancer is a logical step to follow.

A phase II study of multimodality treatment for locally advanced cervical cancer: neoadjuvant carboplatin and paclitaxel followed by radical hysterectomy and adjuvant cisplatin chemoradiation

BACKGROUND

Our aim was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by radical hysterectomy and adjuvant radiation concurrent with weekly cisplatin for locally advanced cervical carcinoma.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Forty-three patients staged as IB2-IIIB were treated with three 21-day courses of carboplatin (area under the time-concentration curve 6 mg.min/ml) and paclitaxel at 175 mg/m(2) by 3-h infusion both on day 1 followed by radical type III hysterectomy and adjuvant radiation concurrent with 6-weekly doses of cisplatin at 40 mg/m(2). Response rate, resectability, toxicity and survival were evaluated.

RESULTS

From December 2000 to June 2001, 43 patients were recruited. All were evaluated for response and toxicity to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. A total of 129 courses were administered. Clinical responses were seen in 41 patients (95%) [95% confidence interval (CI) 89.2% to 100%] with four (9%) complete and 37 (86%) partial. Forty-one patients underwent surgery (resectability 95%); pathologically complete or near-complete responses were seen in seven (17%) and eight (20%), respectively, positive surgical margins in five (12%), and positive pelvic lymph nodes in eight (20%). Twenty-six patients were scheduled for adjuvant chemoradiation. External radiation was delivered for 42.8 days (range 33-61), with a mean dose of 49.3 Gy (range 46-56), and a median of five cisplatin courses (two to six). The mean dose of brachytherapy was 32 Gy (range 25.5-35.6). Neoadjuvant therapy was well-tolerated with neutropenia grade 3 and 4 in 12% and 3% of the courses, respectively. Toxicity to adjuvant chemoradiation was mainly hematological and gastrointestinal, mostly grades 1/2. A total of 39 patients completed all scheduled treatment. At a median follow-up of 21 months (range 3-26), the projected overall survival in the intention-to-treat analysis was 79% (95% CI 62% to 88%).

CONCLUSIONS

The triple modality of neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by radical hysterectomy and adjuvant radiation concurrent with cisplatin is a highly active treatment for locally advanced cervical carcinoma with acceptable toxicity.

Gemcitabine in cervical cancer

OBJECTIVE

Recurrent and advanced cervical cancers are associated with high mortality and a lack of effective treatment options, especially for women who are poor candidates for surgery or radiation therapy. The broad clinical effectiveness and low toxicity of gemcitabine in other human malignancies suggest that it might be useful in treating cervical tumors.

METHODS

Fifteen phase I/II clinical trials on the use of gemcitabine, both as a single agent and in combination with cisplatin, in patients with recurrent or advanced carcinoma of the cervix were reviewed. Data from studies in which gemcitabine was used in combination with radiotherapy for induction therapy and with cisplatin for neoadjuvant chemotherapy were also evaluated.

RESULTS

Although single-agent gemcitabine was generally inferior to cisplatin, when used concurrently with cisplatin and/or radiation therapy, objective response rates were high and survival was prolonged. The drug also showed promise when used with cisplatin as neoadjuvant therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Initial studies suggest that gemcitabine may be useful in the management of recurrent or advanced cervical cancer when used concurrently with cisplatin. Accordingly, a large phase III study will compare cisplatin/gemcitabine with the current standard, and further evaluation of gemcitabine appears to be warranted in conjunction with radiotherapy and in the neoadjuvant setting.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for cervical cancer

None of the current surgical or radiation treatment strategies for cervical cancer satisfactorily leads to a high disease-free survival and a low risk for treatment-related complications in patients with bulky or locally-advanced disease. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) prior to surgery or radiation therapy has been studied as a means to reduce tumour bulk and thereby rendering subsequent therapy more effective. Impressive clinical response rates to cisplatin-based NACT have been achieved with acceptable toxicity and survival. Of the patients treated, approximately 20% will achieve a complete clinical response and many of these patients will prove to have a complete pathological response. Although there are too few randomised controlled studies to determine the effectiveness of NACT approaches, relative to standard treatments.

Concomitant chemoradiation versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy in locally advanced cervical carcinoma: results from two consecutive phase II studies

BACKGROUND

Randomized studies comparing induction chemotherapy followed by surgical resection with radiation alone found that the neoadjuvant approach produces better results. So far, this latter modality has not been compared with standard concomitant chemoradiation. The objective of this report was to compare the results of two consecutive phase II studies: neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery or chemoradiation for the unresectable cases versus standard cisplatin-based chemoradiation.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From February 1999 to July 1999, 41 patients with cervical carcinoma, stages IB2-IIIB, were treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Treatment consisted of three 21-day courses of cisplatin 100 mg/m(2) on day 1 and gemcitabine 1000 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8, followed by either surgery or concomitant chemoradiation for the non-operable cases. From August 1999 to December 1999, an equal number of patients having comparable clinicopathological characteristics were treated with six weekly courses of cisplatin 40 mg/m(2) during standard pelvic radiation.

RESULTS

A total of 82 patients were analyzed. Both groups were similar with regard to age, histology, International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage, tumor size, pretreatment hemoglobin levels, parametrial infiltration and performance status. In the neoadjuvant arm the overall response rate to induction chemotherapy was 95% (95% confidence interval 88% to 100%). Twenty-three patients had surgery and 14 underwent chemoradiation. In the definitive chemoradiation study, 38 patients completed treatment, the median number of cisplatin courses was six for a dose intensity of 33 mg/m(2)/week. Doses to points A and B were 85 Gy (range 68-95) and 55 Gy (range 51-65), respectively. Chemoradiation was delivered in 44.6 (range 28-113) days. Complete response rates after all treatment were similar: 97% and 87% in the neoadjuvant and chemoradiation groups, respectively. At a median follow-up of 28 (range 2-33) and 24 (range 3-30) months, respectively, there were no differences in overall survival. To date, 15 and 13 patients in the neoadjuvant and chemoradiation groups, respectively, have died of disease (P = 0.8567).

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this non-randomized comparison suggest that induction chemotherapy followed by surgery or chemoradiation is at least as effective in terms of response and survival as standard cisplatin-based chemoradiation. A randomized study is needed to confirm these findings.

The role of radical hysterectomy and neoadjuvant chemotherapy in carcinoma of the cervix

The patient presenting with a bulky stage IB2 cervical cancer is a therapeutic challenge. None of the current surgical or radiation treatment strategies satisfactorily leads to a high rate of disease-free survival and a low risk of treatment-related complications including ovarian failure and psychosexual deficits. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy may allow for reductions in tumor bulk, thereby rendering radiation therapy more effective or surgery more feasible. Impressive clinical response rates to cisplatin-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy have been achieved with acceptable toxicity. Approximately 20% of patients achieve a complete clinical response, and many also experience a complete pathologic response. There are still too few comparative studies and phase III trials to assess the effectiveness of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radical surgery relative to standard treatments.