Neoadjuvant Radiotherapy After (m)FOLFIRINOX for Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: A TAPS Consortium Study

Optimal timing of surgery after neoadjuvant treatment in borderline resectable pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant treatment (NAT) is standard for borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC). However, consensus is lacking on the optimal surgical timing for patients with BRPC undergoing NAT. The aim of this study was to investigate the long-term outcomes of patients undergoing NAT for BRPC and suggest optimal resection timing.

METHODS

Prospectively collected data for 282 patients with BRPC between January 2007 and December 2019 were retrospectively reviewed. There were 164 patients who underwent NAT followed by surgery, 45 for chemotherapy only, and 73 for upfront surgery. Among them, 150 patients who underwent R0 or R1 resection following NAT were investigated to identify prognostic factors.

RESULTS

Patients receiving NAT followed by surgery showed the best survival (median overall survival [OS]; NAT followed by surgery vs. upfront surgery vs. chemotherapy only; 35 vs. 23 vs. 16 months). In the NAT group, 54 (36.0%) patients received less than 3 months of NAT, 68 (45.3%) received ≥3, <6 months, and 28 (18.7%) received longer than 6 months. Patients receiving ≥3 months of NAT showed an improved OS compared to <3 months (median; not reached vs. 27 months). In the FOLFIRINOX group, patients who received more than eight FOLFIRINOX cycles showed a good prognosis (<6 vs. 6-7 vs. ≥8 cycles; median survival, 26 vs. 41 months vs. not-reached). However, >12 cycles did not carry a survival benefit compared to 8-11 cycles.

CONCLUSION

The optimal resection timing following NAT is once a patient undergoes at least 3 months of neoadjuvant chemotherapy or at least eight FOLFIRINOX cycles.

The preclinical gap in pancreatic cancer and radiotherapy

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma is an aggressive malignancy with limited treatment options. Chemotherapy offers little benefit and, although there is some evidence that radiotherapy may improve response, its use in the clinical management of pancreatic cancer remains controversial due to conflicting reports on its survival benefit. There has also been a lack of clinical trials that directly investigate the efficacy of radiotherapy in pancreatic cancer. The limited progress in the development of radiotherapeutic strategies in pancreatic cancer can be attributed, at least in part, to a dearth of preclinical research and our limited understanding of the effects of radiation on the pancreatic tumour microenvironment. In this Perspective, we discuss how insight into the immunosuppressive tumour microenvironment and the complex signalling between tumour and stromal cells following radiation is needed to develop effective radiosensitising strategies for pancreatic cancer. We also highlight that to have the best chance for successful clinical translation, more preclinical research is required in appropriately complex models.

Clinical and pathological factors associated with survival in patients with pancreatic cancer who receive adjuvant therapy after neoadjuvant therapy: A retrospective multi-institutional analysis

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant therapy is being increasingly used for patients with pancreatic cancer. The role of adjuvant therapy in these patients is unclear. The purpose of this study was to identify clinical and pathologic characteristics that are associated with longer overall survival in patients with pancreatic cancer who receive adjuvant therapy after neoadjuvant therapy.

METHODS

This study was conducted using multi-institutional data. All patients underwent surgery after at least 1 cycle of neoadjuvant therapy for pancreatic cancer. Patients who died within 3 months after surgery and were known to have distant metastasis or macroscopic residual disease were excluded. Mann-Whitney U test, χ2 analysis, Kaplan-Meier plot, and univariate and multivariate Cox regression analysis were performed as statistical analyses.

RESULTS

In the present study, 529 patients with resected pancreatic cancer after neoadjuvant therapy were reviewed. For neoadjuvant therapy, 177 (33.5%) patients received neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and 352 (66.5%) patients received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. The median duration of neoadjuvant therapy was 7.0 months (interquartile range, 5.0-8.7). Patients were followed for a median of 23.0 months after surgery. Adjuvant therapy was administered to 297 (56.1%) patients and was not associated with longer overall survival for the entire cohort (24 vs 22 months, P = .31). Interaction analysis showed that adjuvant therapy was associated with longer overall survival in patients who received less than 4 months neoadjuvant therapy (hazard ratio 0.40; 95% confidence interval 0.17-0.95; P = .03) or who had microscopic margin positive surgical resections (hazard ratio 0.56; 95% confidence interval 0.33-0.93; P = .03).

CONCLUSION

In this retrospective study, there was a survival benefit associated with adjuvant therapy for patients who received less than 4 months of neoadjuvant therapy or had microscopic positive margins.

Improved Clinical Staging System for Localized Pancreatic Cancer Using the ABC Factors: A TAPS Consortium Study

PURPOSE

Previous studies suggest that besides anatomy (A: resectable, borderline resectable [BR], or locally advanced [LA]) also biologic (B: carbohydrate antigen 19-9 [CA 19-9]) and conditional (C: performance status) factors should be considered when staging patients with localized pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). The prognostic value of the combined ABC factors has not been quantitatively validated.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study, we evaluated patients with localized PDAC treated with initial (modified) fluorouracil with leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin ([m]FOLFIRINOX) at five high-volume pancreatic cancer centers in the United States and the Netherlands (2012-2019). Multivariable Cox proportional hazards analysis was used to investigate the impact of the ABC factors for overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

Overall, 1,835 patients with localized PDAC were included. Tumor stage at diagnosis was potentially resectable in 346 (18.9%), BR in 531 (28.9%), and LA in 958 (52.2%) patients. The baseline CA 19-9 was >500 U/mL in 559 patients (32.5%). Performance status was ≥1 in 1,110 patients (60.7%). Independent poor prognostic factors for OS were BR disease (hazard ratio [HR], 1.26 [95% CI, 1.06 to 1.50]), LA disease (HR, 1.71 [95% CI, 1.45 to 2.02]), CA 19-9 >500 U/mL (HR, 1.36 [95% CI, 1.21 to 1.52]), and WHO performance status ≥1 (HR, 1.31 [95% CI, 1.16 to 1.47]). Patients were assigned 1 point for each poor ABC factor and 2 points for LA disease. The median OS for patients with score 0-4 was 49.7, 29.9, 22.0, 19.1, and 14.9 months with corresponding 5-year OS rates of 47.0%, 28.9%, 19.2%, 9.3%, and 4.8%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The ABC factors of tumor anatomy, CA 19-9, and performance status at diagnosis were independent prognostic factors for OS in patients with localized PDAC treated with initial (m)FOLFIRINOX. Staging of patients with localized PDAC at diagnosis should be based on anatomy, CA 19-9, and performance status.

Impact of Neoadjuvant Therapy for Pancreatic Cancer: Transatlantic Trend and Postoperative Outcomes Analysis

BACKGROUND

The introduction of modern chemotherapy a decade ago has led to increased use of neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). A recent North American study demonstrated increased use of NAT and improved operative outcomes in patients with PDAC. The aims of this study were to compare the use of NAT and short-term outcomes in patients with PDAC undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) among registries from the US and Canada, Germany, the Netherlands, and Sweden.

STUDY DESIGN

Databases from 2 multicenter (voluntary) and 2 nationwide (mandatory) registries were queried from 2018 to 2020. Patients undergoing PD for PDAC were compared based on the use of upfront surgery vs NAT. Adoption of NAT was measured in each country over time. Thirty-day outcomes, including the composite measure (ideal outcomes), were compared by multivariable analyses. Sensitivity analyses of patients undergoing vascular resection were performed.

RESULTS

Overall, 11,402 patients underwent PD for PDAC with 33.7% of patients receiving NAT. The use of NAT increased steadily from 28.3% in 2018 to 38.5% in 2020 (p < 0.0001). However, use of NAT varied widely by country: the US (46.8%), the Netherlands (44.9%), Sweden (11.0%), and Germany (7.8%). On multivariable analysis, NAT was significantly (p < 0.01) associated with reduced rates of serious morbidity, clinically relevant pancreatic fistulae, reoperations, and increased ideal outcomes. These associations remained on sensitivity analysis of patients undergoing vascular resection.

CONCLUSIONS

NAT before PD for pancreatic cancer varied widely among 4 Western audits yet increased by 26% during 3 years. NAT was associated with improved short-term outcomes.

Targeted irradiation in an autochthonous mouse model of pancreatic cancer

The value of radiotherapy in the treatment of pancreatic cancer has been the subject of much debate but limited preclinical research. We hypothesise that the poor translation of radiation research into clinical trials of radiotherapy in pancreatic cancer is due, in part, to inadequate preclinical study models. Here, we developed and refined methods for targeted irradiation in autochthonous mouse models of pancreatic cancer, using a small animal radiotherapy research platform. We tested and optimised strategies for administration of contrast agents, iohexol and the liver imaging agent Fenestra LC, to enable the use of computed tomography imaging in tumour localisation. We demonstrate accurate tumour targeting, negligible off-target effects and therapeutic efficacy, depending on dose, number of fractions and tumour size, and provide a proof of concept that precise radiation can be delivered effectively to mouse pancreatic tumours with a clinically relevant microenvironment. This advance will allow investigation of the radiation response in murine pancreatic cancer, discovery of mechanisms and biomarkers of radiosensitivity or resistance, and development of radiosensitising strategies to inform clinical trials for precision radiotherapy in this disease.

Preoperative chemotherapy, radiotherapy and surgical decision-making in patients with borderline resectable and locally advanced pancreatic cancer

Surgical resection combined with systemic chemotherapy is the cornerstone of treatment for patients with localized pancreatic cancer. Upfront surgery is considered suboptimal in cases with extensive vascular involvement, which can be classified as either borderline resectable pancreatic cancer or locally advanced pancreatic cancer. In these patients, FOLFIRINOX or gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel chemotherapy is currently used as preoperative chemotherapy and is eventually combined with radiotherapy. Thus, more patients might reach 5-year overall survival. Patient selection for chemotherapy, radiotherapy and subsequent surgery is based on anatomical, biological and conditional parameters. Current guidelines and clinical practices vary considerably regarding preoperative chemotherapy and radiotherapy, response evaluation, and indications for surgery. In this Review, we provide an overview of the clinical evidence regarding disease staging, preoperative therapy, response evaluation and surgery in patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer or locally advanced pancreatic cancer. In addition, a clinical work-up is proposed based on the available evidence and guidelines. We identify knowledge gaps and outline a proposed research agenda.

Initial Observation of Contrast Profiles for 2-Dimensional and 3-Dimensional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Sequences in Magnetic Resonance-Guided Radiation Therapy for Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer

Purpose

In our experience treating locally advanced pancreatic cancer with magnetic resonance-guided radiation therapy (MRgRT), the true-fast imaging with steady-state free precession sequences used to generate both the real-time 2-dimensional (2D) magnetic resonance images (MRI; 2D cine) and the pretreatment high-resolution 3-dimensional (3D) MRI impart differing intensities for relevant structures between the 2 scans. Since these variations can confound target tracking selection, we propose that an understanding of the differing contrast profiles could improve selection of tracking structures.

Methods and Materials

We retrospectively reviewed both 2D cine and 3D MRI images for 20 patients with pancreatic cancer treated with MRgRT. At simulation, an appropriate tracking target was identified and contoured on a single 3-mm sagittal slice of the 3D MRI. This sagittal slice was directly compared with the coregistered 7-mm 2D cine to identify structures with notable discrepancies in signal intensity. The 3D MRI was then explored in additional planes to confirm structure identities. For quantitative verification of the clinically observed differences, the pixel intensity distributions of 2D cine and 3D MRI digital imaging and communications in medicine data sets were statistically compared.

Results

In all patients reviewed, arteries (aorta, celiac, superior mesenteric artery, hepatic artery) appeared mildly hyperintense on both scans. However, veins (portal vein, superior mesenteric vein) appeared hyperintense on 2D cine but isointense on 3D MRI. Biliary structures appeared mildly hyperintense on 2D cine but starkly hyperintense on 3D MRI. The pixel intensity distributions extracted from 2D cine and 3D MRI images were confirmed to differ significantly (2 sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov test; test statistic, 0.40; P < .001).

Conclusions

There are significant variations in image intensity between the immediate pretreatment 2D cine compared with the initial planning 3D MRI. Understanding variations of image intensity between the different MRI sequences used in MRgRT is valuable to radiation oncologists and may lead to improved target tracking and optimized treatment delivery.

A Multi-Institutional Phase 2 Trial of Ablative 5-Fraction Stereotactic Magnetic Resonance-Guided On-Table Adaptive Radiation Therapy for Borderline Resectable and Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer

PURPOSE

Magnetic resonance (MR) image guidance may facilitate safe ultrahypofractionated radiation dose escalation for inoperable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. We conducted a prospective study evaluating the safety of 5-fraction Stereotactic MR-guided on-table Adaptive Radiation Therapy (SMART) for locally advanced (LAPC) and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Patients with LAPC or BRPC were eligible for this multi-institutional, single-arm, phase 2 trial after ≥3 months of systemic therapy without evidence of distant progression. Fifty gray in 5 fractions was prescribed on a 0.35T MR-guided radiation delivery system. The primary endpoint was acute grade ≥3 gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity definitely attributed to SMART.

RESULTS

One hundred thirty-six patients (LAPC 56.6%, BRPC 43.4%) were enrolled between January 2019 and January 2022. Mean age was 65.7 (36-85) years. Head of pancreas lesions were most common (66.9%). Induction chemotherapy mostly consisted of (modified)FOLFIRINOX (65.4%) or gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (16.9%). Mean CA19-9 after induction chemotherapy and before SMART was 71.7 U/mL (0-468). On-table adaptive replanning was performed for 93.1% of all delivered fractions. Median follow-up from diagnosis and SMART was 16.4 and 8.8 months, respectively. The incidence of acute grade ≥3 GI toxicity possibly or probably attributed to SMART was 8.8%, including 2 postoperative deaths that were possibly related to SMART in patients who had surgery. There was no acute grade ≥3 GI toxicity definitely related to SMART. One-year overall survival from SMART was 65.0%.

CONCLUSIONS

The primary endpoint of this study was met with no acute grade ≥3 GI toxicity definitely attributed to ablative 5-fraction SMART. Although it is unclear whether SMART contributed to postoperative toxicity, we recommend caution when pursuing surgery, especially with vascular resection after SMART. Additional follow-up is ongoing to evaluate late toxicity, quality of life, and long-term efficacy.

"Conversion surgery" for locally advanced pancreatic cancer: A position paper by the study group at the joint meeting of the International Association of Pancreatology (IAP) & Japan Pancreas Society (JPS) 2022

Locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC), which progresses locally and surrounds major vessels, has historically been deemed unresectable. Surgery alone failed to provide curative resection and improve overall survival. With the advancements in treatment, reports have shown favorable results in LAPC after undergoing successful chemotherapy therapy or chemoradiation therapy followed by surgical resection, so-called "conversion surgery", at experienced high-volume centers. However, recognizing significant regional and institutional disparities in the management of LAPC, an international consensus meeting on conversion surgery for LAPC was held during the Joint Congress of the 26th Meeting of the International Association of Pancreatology (IAP) and the 53rd Annual Meeting of Japan Pancreas Society (JPS) in Kyoto in July 2022. During the meeting, presenters reported the current best multidisciplinary practices for LAPC, including preoperative modalities, best systemic treatment regimens and durations, procedures of conversion surgery with or without vascular resections, biomarkers, and genetic studies. It was unanimously agreed among the experts in this meeting that "cancer biology is surpassing locoregional anatomical resectability" in the era of effective multiagent treatment. The biology of pancreatic cancer has yet to be further elucidated, and we believe it is essential to improve the treatment outcomes of LAPC patients through continued efforts from each institution and more international collaboration. This article summarizes the agreement during the discussion amongst the experts in the meeting. We hope that this will serve as a foundation for future international collaboration and recommendations for future guidelines.

Perioperative or adjuvant mFOLFIRINOX for resectable pancreatic cancer (PREOPANC-3): study protocol for a multicenter randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Surgical resection followed by adjuvant mFOLFIRINOX (5-fluorouracil with leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin) is currently the standard of care for patients with resectable pancreatic cancer. The main concern regarding adjuvant chemotherapy is that only half of patients actually receive adjuvant treatment. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy, on the other hand, guarantees early systemic treatment and may increase chemotherapy use and thereby improve overall survival. Furthermore, it may prevent futile surgery in patients with rapidly progressive disease. However, some argue that neoadjuvant therapy delays surgery, which could lead to progression towards unresectable disease and thus offset the potential benefits. Comparison of perioperative (i.e., neoadjuvant and adjuvant) with (only) adjuvant administration of mFOLFIRINOX in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) is needed to determine the optimal approach.

METHODS

This multicenter, phase 3, RCT will include 378 patients with resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma with a WHO performance status of 0 or 1. Patients are recruited from 20 Dutch centers and three centers in Norway and Sweden. Resectable pancreatic cancer is defined as no arterial contact and ≤ 90 degrees venous contact. Patients in the intervention arm are scheduled for 8 cycles of neoadjuvant mFOLFIRINOX followed by surgery and 4 cycles of adjuvant mFOLFIRINOX (2-week cycle of oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, leucovorin 400 mg/m2, irinotecan 150 mg/m2 at day 1, followed by 46 h continuous infusion of 5-fluorouracil 2400 g/m2). Patients in the comparator arm start with surgery followed by 12 cycles of adjuvant mFOLFIRINOX. The primary outcome is overall survival by intention-to-treat. Secondary outcomes include progression-free survival, resection rate, quality of life, adverse events, and surgical complications. To detect a hazard ratio of 0.70 with 80% power, 252 events are needed. The number of events is expected to be reached after the inclusion of 378 patients in 36 months, with analysis planned 18 months after the last patient has been randomized.

DISCUSSION

The multicenter PREOPANC-3 trial compares perioperative mFOLFIRINOX with adjuvant mFOLFIRINOX in patients with resectable pancreatic cancer.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical Trials: NCT04927780. Registered June 16, 2021.

FOLFIRINOX or Gemcitabine-based Chemotherapy for Borderline Resectable and Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: A Multi-institutional, Patient-Level, Meta-analysis and Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic cancer often presents as locally advanced (LAPC) or borderline resectable (BRPC). Neoadjuvant systemic therapy is recommended as initial treatment. It is currently unclear what chemotherapy should be preferred for patients with BRPC or LAPC.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review and multi-institutional meta-analysis of patient-level data regarding the use of initial systemic therapy for BRPC and LAPC. Outcomes were reported separately for tumor entity and by chemotherapy regimen including FOLFIRINOX (FIO) or gemcitabine-based.

RESULTS

A total of 23 studies comprising 2930 patients were analyzed for overall survival (OS) calculated from the beginning of systemic treatment. OS for patients with BRPC was 22.0 months with FIO, 16.9 months with gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (Gem/nab), 21.6 months with gemcitabine/cisplatin or oxaliplatin or docetaxel or capecitabine (GemX), and 10 months with gemcitabine monotherapy (Gem-mono) (p < 0.0001). In patients with LAPC, OS also was higher with FIO (17.1 months) compared with Gem/nab (12.5 months), GemX (12.3 months), and Gem-mono (9.4 months; p < 0.0001). This difference was driven by the patients who did not undergo surgery, where FIO was superior to other regimens. The resection rates for patients with BRPC were 0.55 for gemcitabine-based chemotherapy and 0.53 with FIO. In patients with LAPC, resection rates were 0.19 with Gemcitabine and 0.28 with FIO. In resected patients, OS for patients with BRPC was 32.9 months with FIO and not different compared to Gem/nab, (28.6 months, p = 0.285), GemX (38.8 months, p = 0.1), or Gem-mono (23.1 months, p = 0.083). A similar trend was observed in resected patients converted from LAPC.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with BRPC or LAPC, primary treatment with FOLFIRINOX compared with Gemcitabine-based chemotherapy appears to provide a survival benefit for patients that are ultimately unresectable. For patients that undergo surgical resection, outcomes are similar between GEM+ and FOLFIRINOX when delivered in the neoadjuvant setting.

R1 pancreatic cancer patients benefit from chemoradiation when initiation of adjuvant therapy is delayed

BACKGROUND

Adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) following pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) for pancreas cancer (PDAC) has been demonstrated to improve survival. However, the optimal adjuvant treatment (AT) regimen for R1-margin patients remains unclear. This retrospective study investigates the impact of AC vs. adjuvant chemoradiotherapy (ACRT) on survival (OS).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The NCDB was queried for patients with PDAC who underwent PD between 2010 and 2018. Patients were divided into, (A) AC<60 days, (B) ACRT<60 days, (C) AC≥60 days, and (D) ACRT≥60 days. Kaplan-Meier survival analyses and Cox multivariable regression analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Among 13 740 patients, median OS was 23.7 months. For R1 patients, median OS for timely AC and ACRT, and delayed AC and ACRT was 19.91, 19.19, 15.24, 18.96 months, respectively. While time of AC initiation was an insignificant factor for R0 patients (p = 0.263, CI 0.957-1.173), a survival benefit was found for R1 patients who received AC<60 vs. ≥60 days (p = 0.041, CI 1.002-1.42). Among R1 patients, administration of delayed ACRT achieves the same survival benefit of timely AC initiation (p = 0.074, CI 0.703-1.077).

CONCLUSION

The study suggests value in ACRT for patients with R1 margins when delay of AT≥60 days cannot be avoided. Hence, ACRT may mitigate the negative impact of delayed AT initiation for R1-patients.

Top Pancreatic Tumor Articles from 2021 to Inform Your Cancer Patients

BACKGROUND

More than 10,000 publications about pancreatic cancer were found on PubMed during the past year.

METHODS

To best inform patients with pancreatic cancer, the obvious, frequent questions asked during patient counseling when dealing with resectable pancreatic cancer, borderline resectable pancreatic cancer, and unresectable pancreatic cancer were considered.

RESULTS

The publications highlighted are comprehensive on the current management of neoadjuvant therapy for resectable pancreatic cancer, the addition of radiation to neoadjuvant therapy for borderline resectable pancreatic cancer, the utility of arterial resections in unresectable pancreatic cancer, and the role of minimally invasive approach to pancreatic cancer surgical therapy.

CONCLUSION

These articles are high yield and comprehensive review on key issues facing surgical oncologists who operate on pancreatic cancer.

Transparency of clinical trials in pancreatic cancer: An analysis of availability of trial results from the ClinicalTrials.gov database

Background

Pancreatic cancer (PC) is a highly malignant tumor of the digestive system. As clinical trials involving PC are increasingly being conducted, the transparency of the generated data has become an important issue of concern. In other areas of medicine, clinical trial transparency presents a worrying state of affairs. However, at present, there has been no study examining the transparency of data derived from PC clinical trials.

Methods

A comprehensive search was conducted in the ClinicalTrial.gov database for clinical trials investigating pancreatic cancer as of June 2022. We examined the availability of clinical trial results and recorded the characteristics of the trials.

Results

A total of 856 trials were included in this study, of which 668 were completed and 188 were terminated or suspended. The results of 626 trials (73.13%) were available, of these 230 trials (26.87%) did not disclose any information on the trial data in any form. The publication rate for trials with available results was 86.10%, but the report rate on ClinicalTrial.gov was only 39.78%.

Conclusion

Although approximately 90% of clinical trial investigating interventions on patients with PC have published study results, 30% of trials did not report any findings, and the disclosure of trial results from ClinicalTrial.gov was unsatisfactory. In general, there is still room for improvement in the transparency of PC clinical trials.

Hysterectomy or/and lymphadenectomy for the survival of patients with primary endometrial cancer: a cohort study using the SEER database

In order to provide a clinical reference for endometrial cancer treatment, this retrospective cohort study aimed to assess and compare the survival of endometrial cancer patients undergoing hysterectomy versus lymphadenectomy and hysterectomy combined with lymphadenectomy. The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database provided data on patients with primary endometrial cancer enrolled between 1975 and 2016. The longest follow-up time was ten years, and the median follow-up time was 51.00 months. The outcomes were overall survival (OS) and cancer-specificsurvival (CSS). COX models were constructed to assess the relationship between the three surgical methods and OS or CSS. Subgroup analyses were conducted based on American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) stage and menopausal status. Totally 134,597 patients were included. In stage IV, the lymphadenectomy group had significantly worse OS than the hysterectomy group (HR = 1.330, 95%CI = 1.101-1.606). The hysterectomy combined with lymphadenectomy group had similar OS to the hysterectomy group (HR = 1.183, 95%CI = 0.996-1.405). Regarding CSS, no significant differences were found between the hysterectomy and lymphadenectomy groups (HR = 1.267, 95%CI = 0.996-1.610), and between the hysterectomy and hysterectomy combined with lymphadenectomy groups (HR = 1.186, 95%CI = 0.953-1.476) in stage IV. For postmenopausal women, lymphadenectomy (HR = 1.655, 95%CI = 1.495-1.831) and hysterectomy combined with lymphadenectomy (HR = 1.129, 95%CI = 1.038-1.228) were associated with significantly decreased OSthan hysterectomy. For CSS among postmenopausal women, significant declines inCSS were found in the lymphadenectomy (HR = 2.264, 95%CI = 1.957-2.619) and hysterectomy combined with lymphadenectomy (HR = 1.419, 95%CI = 1.260-1.599) groups versus the hysterectomy group. Hysterectomy may serve as a decision-making reference for clinicians in treating patients in stage IV or after menopause, combined with clinical experience and patients' wishes.