Bifunctional pathway of uterine carcinosarcomas

Uterine carcinosarcoma: A review of the literature

OBJECTIVE

Uterine carcinosarcomas (UCSs) are aggressive tumors previously considered to be sarcomas, but now recognized as malignancies composed of metaplastic transformation of epithelial elements. Much of the management for UCS has been extrapolated from studies of endometrial carcinomas and sarcomas. This article critically reviews the literature pertinent to the pathology, pathogenesis, diagnosis and management of women with UCS.

METHODS

MEDLINE was searched for English language literature on UCS with a focus on the past 20years. Given the rarity of this tumor, studies were not limited by design or number of reported patients.

RESULTS

UCS is biologically a de-differentiated endometrial carcinoma with its own pathogenesis and molecular profile. It commonly presents with extrauterine disease which can be identified by comprehensive surgical staging. Most UCS patients are candidates for adjuvant chemotherapy. The role of radiation is less clear. Combination therapy, while commonly used, has not been studied in depth. The high recurrence rate and poor overall survival for UCS suggest an ongoing need for clinical trials for UCS specifically.

CONCLUSIONS

UCS represents a distinct subtype of uterine malignancy, and should be studied as such via focused clinical trials.

Phase III randomised study to evaluate the role of adjuvant pelvic radiotherapy in the treatment of uterine sarcomas stages I and II: an European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Gynaecological Cancer Group Study (protocol 55874)

The management of uterine sarcomas continues to present many difficulties. Primary surgery is the optimal treatment but the role of post-operative radiation remains uncertain. In the mid-1980s, the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Gynaecological Cancer Group Study proposed a trial to evaluate adjuvant radiotherapy, as previous non-randomised studies had suggested a survival advantage and improved local control when post-operative radiation was administered. The study opened in 1987 taking 13 years to accrue 224 patients. All uterine sarcoma subtypes were permitted. Patients were required to have undergone as a minimum, TAH and BSO and wahsings (166 patients) but nodal sampling was optional. There were 103 leiomyosarcomas (LMS), 91 carcinosarcomas (CS) and 28 endometrial stromal sarcomas (ESS). Patients were randomised to either observation or pelvic radiation, 51 Gy in 28 fractions over 5 weeks. Hundred and twelve were recruited to each arm. The initial analysis has shown a reduction in local relapse (14 versus 24, p=0.004) but no effect on either OS or PFS. No unexpected toxicity was seen in the radiation arm. No difference in either overall or disease-free survival was demonstrated but there is an increased local control for the CS patients receiving radiation but without any benefit for LMS. Prognostic factor analysis shows that stage, age and histological subtype were important predictors of behaviour which may explain differences between CS and LMS. CS appears to show more kinship to poorly differentiated endometrial carcinomas in behaviour. LMS did not show the same benefit from radiation. These results will help shape future management and clinical trials in uterine sarcomas.