• Something wrong with this record ?

Surgical treatment of "intermediate risk" lymph node negative cervical cancer patients without adjuvant radiotherapy-A retrospective cohort study and review of the literature

D. Cibula, NR. Abu-Rustum, D. Fischerova, S. Pather, K. Lavigne, J. Slama, K. Alektiar, L. Ming-Yin, R. Kocian, A. Germanova, F. Frühauf, L. Dostalek, L. Dusek, K. Narayan,

. 2018 ; 151 (3) : 438-443. [pub] 20181020

Language English Country United States

Document type Journal Article, Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't, Review

Grant support
NV16-31643A MZ0 CEP Register

OBJECTIVES: The role of adjuvant radiotherapy for lymph node-negative stage IB patients with tumor-related negative prognostic factors is not uniformly accepted. It is advocated based on the GOG 92 trial, which was initiated in 1989. The aim of the current study is to report the oncological outcome of "intermediate risk" patients treated by tailored surgery without adjuvant radiotherapy. Data from two institutions that refer these patients for adjuvant radiotherapy served as a control group. METHODS: Included were patients with stage IB cervical cancer treated with radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy, who had negative pelvic lymph nodes but a combination of negative prognostic factors adopted from the GOG 92 trial. Data were obtained from prospectively collected databases of three institutions. Radical surgery was a single-treatment modality in one of them and in the remaining two institutes it was followed by adjuvant chemoradiation. RESULTS: In 127 patients who received only radical surgery, with a median follow-up of 6.1 years, the local recurrence rate was 1.6% (2 cases), and total recurrence was 6.3% (8 cases). Disease-specific survival at 5 years was 95.7% (91.9%; 99.4%) and 91% (83.7%; 98.3%) at 10 years. The only significant factor for disease-specific survival was tumor size ≥4 cm (P = 0.032). The recurrence rate, local control or overall survival did not differ from the control group. Adjuvant radiotherapy was not a significant prognostic factor within the whole cohort. CONCLUSIONS: An excellent oncological outcome, especially local control, can be achieved by both radical surgery or combined treatment in stage IB lymph node-negative cervical cancer patients with negative prognostic factors. The substantially better outcome than in the GOG 92 trial can be attributed to more accurate pre-operative and pathological staging and an improvement in surgical techniques.

References provided by Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc19012235
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20190411132240.0
007      
ta
008      
190405s2018 xxu f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.1016/j.ygyno.2018.10.018 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)30348519
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a xxu
100    1_
$a Cibula, David $u Gynecologic Oncology Center, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University in Prague and General University Hospital in Prague, Czech Republic. Electronic address: dc@davidcibula.cz.
245    10
$a Surgical treatment of "intermediate risk" lymph node negative cervical cancer patients without adjuvant radiotherapy-A retrospective cohort study and review of the literature / $c D. Cibula, NR. Abu-Rustum, D. Fischerova, S. Pather, K. Lavigne, J. Slama, K. Alektiar, L. Ming-Yin, R. Kocian, A. Germanova, F. Frühauf, L. Dostalek, L. Dusek, K. Narayan,
520    9_
$a OBJECTIVES: The role of adjuvant radiotherapy for lymph node-negative stage IB patients with tumor-related negative prognostic factors is not uniformly accepted. It is advocated based on the GOG 92 trial, which was initiated in 1989. The aim of the current study is to report the oncological outcome of "intermediate risk" patients treated by tailored surgery without adjuvant radiotherapy. Data from two institutions that refer these patients for adjuvant radiotherapy served as a control group. METHODS: Included were patients with stage IB cervical cancer treated with radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy, who had negative pelvic lymph nodes but a combination of negative prognostic factors adopted from the GOG 92 trial. Data were obtained from prospectively collected databases of three institutions. Radical surgery was a single-treatment modality in one of them and in the remaining two institutes it was followed by adjuvant chemoradiation. RESULTS: In 127 patients who received only radical surgery, with a median follow-up of 6.1 years, the local recurrence rate was 1.6% (2 cases), and total recurrence was 6.3% (8 cases). Disease-specific survival at 5 years was 95.7% (91.9%; 99.4%) and 91% (83.7%; 98.3%) at 10 years. The only significant factor for disease-specific survival was tumor size ≥4 cm (P = 0.032). The recurrence rate, local control or overall survival did not differ from the control group. Adjuvant radiotherapy was not a significant prognostic factor within the whole cohort. CONCLUSIONS: An excellent oncological outcome, especially local control, can be achieved by both radical surgery or combined treatment in stage IB lymph node-negative cervical cancer patients with negative prognostic factors. The substantially better outcome than in the GOG 92 trial can be attributed to more accurate pre-operative and pathological staging and an improvement in surgical techniques.
650    _2
$a kohortové studie $7 D015331
650    _2
$a ženské pohlaví $7 D005260
650    _2
$a lidé $7 D006801
650    _2
$a lymfatické uzliny $x patologie $7 D008198
650    _2
$a lidé středního věku $7 D008875
650    _2
$a adjuvantní radioterapie $x metody $7 D018714
650    _2
$a retrospektivní studie $7 D012189
650    _2
$a nádory děložního čípku $x patologie $x chirurgie $7 D002583
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
655    _2
$a Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural $7 D052061
655    _2
$a práce podpořená grantem $7 D013485
655    _2
$a přehledy $7 D016454
700    1_
$a Abu-Rustum, Nadeem R $u Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, and Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA.
700    1_
$a Fischerova, Daniela $u Gynecologic Oncology Center, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University in Prague and General University Hospital in Prague, Czech Republic.
700    1_
$a Pather, Selvan $u Chris O'Brien Comprehensive Cancer Centre, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
700    1_
$a Lavigne, Katie $u Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, and Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA.
700    1_
$a Slama, Jiri $u Gynecologic Oncology Center, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University in Prague and General University Hospital in Prague, Czech Republic.
700    1_
$a Alektiar, Kaled $u Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, and Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA.
700    1_
$a Ming-Yin, Lin $u Department of Radiation Oncology and Cancer Imaging, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, and Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Melbourne University, Melbourne, Australia.
700    1_
$a Kocian, Roman $u Gynecologic Oncology Center, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University in Prague and General University Hospital in Prague, Czech Republic.
700    1_
$a Germanova, Anna $u Gynecologic Oncology Center, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University in Prague and General University Hospital in Prague, Czech Republic.
700    1_
$a Frühauf, Filip $u Gynecologic Oncology Center, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University in Prague and General University Hospital in Prague, Czech Republic.
700    1_
$a Dostalek, Lukas $u Gynecologic Oncology Center, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University in Prague and General University Hospital in Prague, Czech Republic.
700    1_
$a Dusek, Ladislav $u Institute for Biostatistics and Analyses, Faculty of Medicine, Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic.
700    1_
$a Narayan, Kailash $u Department of Radiation Oncology and Cancer Imaging, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, and Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Melbourne University, Melbourne, Australia.
773    0_
$w MED00001958 $t Gynecologic oncology $x 1095-6859 $g Roč. 151, č. 3 (2018), s. 438-443
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30348519 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y a $z 0
990    __
$a 20190405 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20190411132258 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 1391545 $s 1050540
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC
BMC    __
$a 2018 $b 151 $c 3 $d 438-443 $e 20181020 $i 1095-6859 $m Gynecologic oncology $n Gynecol Oncol $x MED00001958
GRA    __
$a NV16-31643A $p MZ0
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20190405

Find record

Citation metrics

Loading data ...

Archiving options

Loading data ...