CERVANTES: an international randomized trial of radical surgery followed by adjuvant (chemo) radiation versus no further treatment in patients with early-stage, intermediate-risk cervical cancer (CEEGOG-CX-05; ENGOT-CX16)

Assessment of postoperative therapy de-escalation for early-stage, intermediate-risk cervical cancer

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to assess the oncologic outcome of surgically-treated patients with early-stage, intermediate-risk cervical cancer according to postoperative therapy modality.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study queried the Japanese Gynecologic Oncology Group's nationwide surgical data platform. The study population was 1084 patients with stage IB cervical cancer who underwent primary radical hysterectomy and lymphadenectomy from 2004 to 2008. Histology type-incorporated intermediate-risk factor patterns were clustered into three groups based on recurrence risk. Oncologic outcomes were assessed per postoperative therapy: external beam radiotherapy alone, concurrent chemo-radiotherapy, chemotherapy alone, and no treatment.

RESULTS

Histology-incorporated intermediate-risk groups included: no lympho-vascular space invasion in any histology, or squamous cell carcinoma with lympho-vascular space invasion but no deep stromal invasion (n=559, 51.6%, group 1); squamous cell carcinoma with both lympho-vascular space invasion and deep cervical stromal invasion (n=281, 25.9%; group 2); and non-squamous histology with lympho-vascular space invasion (n=244, 22.5%; group 3). The 5-year disease-free survival rates were 93.3%, 89.3%, and 82.5% for group 1,-2, and -3, respectively (p<0.001), with group 3 exhibiting an almost three-fold increased recurrence risk compared with group 1 (adjusted-hazard ratio (aHR) 2.70, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.70-4.32), followed by group 2 (aHR 1.67, 95% CI 1.01 to 2.75). Disease-free survival was similar across the postoperative therapy groups: 5 year rates for external beam radiotherapy alone, concurrent chemo-radiotherapy, chemotherapy alone, and no postoperative treatment, 94.8%, 87.2%, 93.6%, and 94.2% for group 1 (p=0.294); 85.0%, 93.3%, 87.3%, and 90.5% for group 2 (p=0.578); and 85.4%, 83.1%, 80.5%, and 83.3% for group 3 (p=0.876). The aHR for disease-free survival comparing no postoperative treatment to external beam radiotherapy alone was 1.10 (95% CI 0.37 to 3.28), 0.71 (95% CI 0.29 to 1.79), and 1.21 (95% CI 0.42 to 3.51) for group 1, group 2, and group 3, respectively. The observed exposure-outcome associations were similar for cause-specific survival (all, p>0.05).

CONCLUSION

In this retrospective investigation in Japan, active surveillance without postoperative therapy following radical hysterectomy and lymphadenectomy was not associated with oncologic outcome in early-stage, intermediate-risk cervical cancer.

Cervical cancer: a new era

Cervical cancer is a major global health issue, ranking as the fourth most common cancer in women worldwide. Depending on stage, histology, and patient factors, the standard management of cervical cancer is a combination of treatment approaches, including (fertility- or non-fertility-sparing) surgery, radiotherapy, platinum-based chemotherapy, and novel systemic therapies such as bevacizumab, immune checkpoint inhibitors, and antibody-drug conjugates. While ambitious global initiatives seek to eliminate cervical cancer as a public health problem, the management of cervical cancer continues to evolve with major advances in imaging modalities, surgical approaches, identification of histopathological risk factors, radiotherapy techniques, and biomarker-driven personalized therapies. In particular, the introduction of immune checkpoint inhibitors has dramatically altered the treatment of cervical cancer, leading to significant survival benefits in both locally advanced and metastatic/recurrent settings. As the landscape of cervical cancer therapies continues to evolve, the aim of the present review is to provide a comprehensive discussion of the current state and the latest practice-changing updates in cervical cancer.

Adjuvant external beam radiotherapy combined with brachytherapy for intermediate-risk cervical cancer

OBJECTIVE

Patients with intermediate-risk cervical cancer receive external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) as adjuvant treatment. It is commonly administered with brachytherapy without proven benefits. Therefore, we evaluated the frequency of brachytherapy use, the doses for EBRT administered alone or with brachytherapy, and the overall survival impact of brachytherapy in patients with intermediate-risk, early-stage cervical cancer.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study was performed using data collected from the National Cancer Database. Patients diagnosed with cervical cancer from 2004 to 2019 who underwent a radical hysterectomy and lymph node staging and had disease limited to the cervix but with tumors larger than 4 cm or ranging from 2 to 4 cm with lymphovascular space invasion (LVSI) were included. Patients with distant metastasis or parametrial involvement were excluded. Patients who underwent EBRT alone were compared with those who also received brachytherapy after 2:1 propensity score matching.

RESULTS

In total, 1174 patients met the inclusion criteria, and 26.7% of them received brachytherapy. After 2:1 propensity score matching, we included 620 patients in the EBRT group and 312 in the combination treatment group. Patients who received brachytherapy had higher equivalent doses than those only receiving EBRT. Overall survival did not differ between the two groups (hazard ratio (HR) 0.88 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.62 to 1.23]; p=0.45). After stratification according to tumor histology, LVSI, and surgical approach, brachytherapy was not associated with improved overall survival. However, in patients who did not receive concomitant chemotherapy, the overall survival rate for those receiving EBRT and brachytherapy was significantly higher than that for those receiving EBRT alone (HR, 0.48 (95% CI, 0.27 to 0.86]; p=0.011).

CONCLUSION

About one-fourth of the study patients received brachytherapy and EBRT. The variability in the doses and radiotherapy techniques used highlights treatment heterogeneity. Overall survival did not differ for EBRT with and without brachytherapy. However, overall survival was longer for patients who received brachytherapy but did not receive concomitant chemotherapy.

Efficacy and safety of chemotherapy as monotherapy in patients with recurrent intermediate/high-risk factors following radical hysterectomy for stage IB-IIA cervical cancer: a single-center retrospective analysis

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to explore the efficacy and safety of chemotherapy (CT) as a monotherapy in patients with recurrent intermediate/high-risk factors following radical hysterectomy for stage IB-IIA cervical cancer.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was conducted on the medical records of patients diagnosed with stage IB-IIA cervical cancer who underwent radical hysterectomy at the People's Hospital of Suzhou High-tech District between 2010 and 2020. A total of 66 patients with intermediate or high-risk factors for recurrence were treated exclusively with CT. This cohort included 42 patients in the intermediate-risk group and 24 in the high-risk group. Treatment protocols consisted of 4-6 cycles of paclitaxel and cisplatin drugs for the intermediate-risk group, and 6 cycles for the high-risk group. The relapse-free survival (RFS), recurrence rates, and common CT-related adverse reactions, including bone marrow suppression, nausea and vomiting, and diarrhea, were assessed for both groups.

RESULTS

(1) The cumulative 3-year RFS rates for the intermediate-risk and high-risk groups were 97.3% (36/37) and 82.4% (14/17), respectively, with cumulative 5-year RFS rates of 97.1% (34/35) and 82.4% (14/17), respectively. The Log rank test revealed no significant difference between the two groups (P > 0.05), (χ² = 2.718, P = 0.099). The 5-year recurrence rates in the intermediate-risk and high-risk groups were 2.38% (1/42) and 12.50% (3/24), respectively. (2) The incidence of grade III bone marrow suppression in the intermediate-risk and high-risk groups was 21.19% (11/42) and 25.00% (6/24), respectively, while the incidence of grade IV bone marrow suppression was 11.90% (5/42) and 8.33% (2/24), respectively. There was no statistically significant difference in bone marrow suppression grades between the two groups (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

CT with paclitaxel and cisplatin, administered as monotherapy post-radical hysterectomy for stage IB-IIA cervical cancer, demonstrates satisfactory survival benefits with an acceptable safety profile. Moreover, no significant differences were observed in prognosis or adverse reactions between the different risk groups treated solely with CT.

Circulating cell-free HPV DNA is a strong marker for disease severity in cervical cancer

For cervical cancer (CC), circulating cell-free HPV DNA (ccfHPV) may establish disease severity. Furthermore, HPV integration has been correlated to viral load and survival. In this study, pre-treatment plasma from 139 CC cases (50 primary surgery patients, 22 primary surgery + adjuvant oncological therapy patients, and 67 primary oncological therapy patients) was collected (2018-2020). Furthermore, plasma from 25 cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 patients and 15 healthy women (negative controls) were collected. Two next-generation sequencing (NGS) panels were used to establish ccfHPV presence and human papillomavirus type 16 (HPV16) integration status. ccfHPV was detected in four primary surgery (8.0%), eight primary surgery + adjuvant oncology (36.4%), and 54 primary oncology (80.6%) patients. For primary oncology patients with HPV16-related cancer (n = 37), more ccfHPVneg than ccfHPVpos patients had HPV16 integration (P = 0.04), and in patients with HPV16 integration (n = 13), ccfHPVpos patients had higher disease stages than ccfHPVneg patients (P = 0.05). In summary, ccfHPV presence is related to disease severity and may add to the debated Sedlis criteria used for identifying patients for adjuvant oncological therapy. However, ccfHPV detection is influenced by HPV integration status and disease stage, and these factors need to be considered in ccfHPVneg patients.

Prognostic value of lymph node ratio in patients with non-metastatic cervical cancer treated with radical hysterectomy: A population-based study

BACKGROUND

The lymph node ratio (LNR) is an emerging prognostic biomarker in multiple malignancies. This study aimed to explore the prognostic role of LNR in patients with non-metastatic cervical cancer undergoing radical hysterectomy.

METHODS

Data were extracted from the SEER 17 registry. Univariate and multivariate Cox analyses were performed to identify the prognostic factors associated with cancer-specific survival (CSS). A nomogram was constructed to predict the 5-year and 10-year CSS. Survival analyses stratified by the status of LNR and different adjuvant treatments were performed using the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

A total of 8128 female patients with non-metastatic cervical cancer who underwent radical hysterectomy and regional node examination (≥8) were enrolled. Of these, 1269 (15.6%) were confirmed as lymph node-positive. Cox regression analyses showed that age, race, tumor size, tumor grade, histology, and LNR were significant factors affecting CSS. A nomogram was developed for predicting the 5-year and 10-year CSS, which showed good discrimination and calibration. Patients without lymph node involvement had inferior CSS with adjuvant treatments compared to those who did not receive further treatment. In patients with LNR ≤10%, only those receiving adjuvant radiotherapy had a trend of better CSS. In patients with an LNR between 10% and 30% and more than 30%, concurrent radiochemotherapy (CCRT) proved to be the best treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

LNR is an independent prognostic factor in patients with non-metastatic cervical cancer undergoing radical hysterectomy. For patients with negative lymph nodes, no further treatment is recommended. Patients with positive lymph nodes could benefit more from CCRT.

Efficacy and safety of consolidation chemotherapy after adjuvant therapy in stage IB-IIA cervical cancer patients with risk factors: a retrospective single-center study

Objective

Accumulated evidence has suggested a relatively high recurrence rate in early-stage cervical cancer (CC) patients with risk factors. This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of consolidation chemotherapy following adjuvant therapy (concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) or radiotherapy (RT) alone) in stage IB-IIA CC patients with risk factors.

Methods

A total of 237 stage IB-IIA CC patients who received radical surgery between January 2014 and December 2021 were included in the retrospective study. According to the types of adjuvant therapies, the patients were classified into the control group (CCRT or RT alone) and the study group (consolidation chemotherapy following CCRT or RT alone). The propensity score matching (PSM) was used to balance baseline characteristics between the two groups. The primary end points of the study were disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS).

Results

For the entire cohort, no significant difference was observed in the DFS or OS between the study and control group, which was also confirmed in the PSM cohort (n=124). The multivariate analysis identified the high-risk factor type was an independent adverse prognostic factor for the patients. In patients with high risk factors, consolidation chemotherapy following adjuvant therapy was significantly associated with better clinical outcomes and identified as an independent prognostic favorable factor. Moreover, this association remained statistically significant in high-risk patients with ≥2 metastatic lymph nodes. In patients with intermediate risk factors, consolidation chemotherapy following adjuvant therapy was unrelated to DFS or OS. The safe assessment demonstrated consolidation chemotherapy following adjuvant therapy was significantly correlated with higher rates of ≥ grade 3 hematologic toxicities in both the global and subgroup analysis stratified by risk factor type.

Conclusion

Consolidation chemotherapy after adjuvant therapy provided survival benefits in stage IB-IIA CC patients with high risk factors, particularly those with ≥2 metastatic lymph nodes. However, related hematologic toxicities should be alerted in patient management. The actual efficacy and safety of consolidation chemotherapy still need to be investigated in more well-designed clinical trials.

Role of Adjuvant Radiotherapy in Patients with Cervical Cancer Undergoing Radical Hysterectomy

The benefit of adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) after radical hysterectomy in patients with cervical cancer remains controversial. The aim of this study was to determine adjuvant RT's impact on survival in accordance with Sedlis criteria. Patients with early-stage cervical cancer undergoing radical hysterectomy between 2005 and 2022 at a single tertiary care institution were included. A multivariate analysis was performed to determinate if RT was an independent prognostic factor for recurrence or death. We also analysed whether there was a statistically significant difference in overall survival (OS) between patients who met only one or two Sedlis criteria, depending on whether they received adjuvant RT or not. 121 patients were included in this retrospective study, of whom 48 (39.7%) received adjuvant RT due to the presence of unfavourable pathological findings. In multivariate analysis, RT was not found to be a statistically significant prognostic factor for OS (p = 0.584) or disease-free survival (DFS) (p = 0.559). When comparing patients who met one or two Sedlis criteria, there were no statistically significant differences in OS between RT and no adjuvant treatment in either group. Since the selection of patients with cervical cancer eligible for surgery is becoming more accurate, adjuvant RT might not be necessary for patients with intermediate risk factors.

SUCCOR Nodes: May Sentinel Node Biopsy Determine the Need for Adjuvant Treatment?

BACKGROUND

The SUCCOR cohort was developed to analyse the overall and disease-free survival at 5 years in women with FIGO 2009 stage IB1 cervical cancer. The aim of this study was to compare the use of adjuvant therapy in these women, depending on the method used to diagnose lymphatic node metastasis.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We used data from the SUCCOR cohort, which collected information from 1049 women with FIGO 2009 stage IB1 cervical cancer who were operated on between January 2013 and December 2014 in Europe. We calculated the adjusted proportion of women who received adjuvant therapy depending on the lymph node diagnosis method and compared disease free and overall survival using Cox proportional-hazards regression models. Inverse probability weighting was used to adjust for baseline potential confounders.

RESULTS

The adjusted proportion of women who received adjuvant therapy was 33.8% in the sentinel node biopsy + lymphadenectomy (SNB+LA) group and 44.7% in the LA group (p = 0.02), although the proportion of positive nodal status was similar (p = 0.30). That difference was greater in women with negative nodal status and positive Sedlis criteria (difference 31.2%, p = 0.01). Here, those who underwent a SNB+LA had an increased risk of relapse [hazard ratio (HR) 2.49, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.98-6.33, p = 0.056] and risk of death (HR 3.49, 95% CI 1.04-11.7, p = 0.042) compared with those who underwent LA.

CONCLUSIONS

Women in this study were less likely to receive adjuvant therapy if their nodal invasion was determined using SNB+LA compared with LA. These results suggest a lack of therapeutic measures available when a negative result is obtained by SNB+LA, which may have an impact on the risk of recurrence and survival.

Role of adjuvant therapy in intermediate-risk cervical cancer patients - Subanalyses of the SCCAN study

OBJECTIVE

The "intermediate-risk" (IR) group of early-stage cervical cancer patients is characterized by negative pelvic lymph nodes and a combination of tumor-related prognostic risk factors such as tumor size ≥2 cm, lymphovascular space invasion (LVSI), and deep stromal invasion. However, the role of adjuvant treatment in these patients remains controversial. We investigated whether adjuvant (chemo)radiation is associated with a survival benefit after radical surgery in patients with IR cervical cancer.

METHODS

We analyzed data from patients with IR cervical cancer (tumor size 2-4 cm plus LVSI OR tumor size >4 cm; N0; no parametrial invasion; clear surgical margins) who underwent primary curative-intent surgery between 2007 and 2016 and were retrospectively registered in the international multicenter Surveillance in Cervical CANcer (SCCAN) study.

RESULTS

Of 692 analyzed patients, 274 (39.6%) received no adjuvant treatment (AT-) and 418 (60.4%) received radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy (AT+). The 5-year disease-free survival (83.2% and 80.3%; PDFS = 0.365) and overall survival (88.7% and 89.0%; POS = 0.281) were not significantly different between the AT- and AT+ groups, respectively. Adjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy was not associated with a survival benefit after adjusting for confounding factors by case-control propensity score matching or in subgroup analyses of patients with tumor size ≥4 cm and <4 cm. In univariable analysis, adjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy was not identified as a prognostic factor in any of the subgroups (full cohort: PDFS = 0.365; POS = 0.282).

CONCLUSION

Among patients with IR early-stage cervical cancer, radical surgery alone achieved equal disease-free and overall survival rates to those achieved by combining radical surgery with adjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy.

Stratification of lymph node metastases as macrometastases, micrometastases, or isolated tumor cells has no clinical implication in patients with cervical cancer: Subgroup analysis of the SCCAN project

BACKGROUND

In cervical cancer, presence of lymph-node macrometastases (MAC) is a major prognostic factor and an indication for adjuvant treatment. However, since clinical impact of micrometastases (MIC) and isolated tumor-cells (ITC) remains controversial, we sought to identify a cut-off value for the metastasis size not associated with negative prognosis.

METHODS

We analyzed data from 967 cervical cancer patients (T1a1L1-T2b) registered in the SCCAN (Surveillance in Cervical CANcer) database, who underwent primary surgical treatment, including sentinel lymph-node (SLN) biopsy with pathological ultrastaging. The size of SLN metastasis was considered a continuous variable and multiple testing was performed for cut-off values of 0.01-1.0 mm. Disease-free survival (DFS) was compared between N0 and subgroups of N1 patients defined by cut-off ranges.

RESULTS

LN metastases were found in 172 (18%) patients, classified as MAC, MIC, and ITC in 79, 54, and 39 patients, respectively. DFS was shorter in patients with MAC (HR 2.20, P = 0.003) and MIC (HR 2.87, P < 0.001), while not differing between MAC/MIC (P = 0.484). DFS in the ITC subgroup was neither different from N0 (P = 0.127) nor from MIC/MAC subgroups (P = 0.449). Cut-off analysis revealed significantly shorter DFS compared to N0 in all subgroups with metastases ≥0.4 mm (HR 2.311, P = 0.04). The significance of metastases <0.4 mm could not be assessed due to limited statistical power (<80%). We did not identify any cut-off for the size of metastasis with significantly better prognosis than the rest of N1 group.

CONCLUSIONS

In cervical cancer patients, the presence of LN metastases ≥0.4 mm was associated with a significant negative impact on DFS and no cut-off value for the size of metastasis with better prognosis than N1 was found. Traditional metastasis stratification based on size has no clinical implication.