Literature DB >> 15385113

Prognostic difference of surgical treatment of exophytic versus barrel-shaped bulky cervical cancer.

J B Trimbos1, A F Lambeek, A A W Peters, R Wolterbeek, K N Gaarenstroom, G J Fleuren, G G Kenter.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to evaluate the prognostic significance of tumor geography, defined as exophytic or barrel-shaped growth, in bulky (>4 cm) cervical cancer.
METHODS: Four hundred women with cervical cancer, treated by primary radical hysterectomy between January 1984 and November 2000, were followed in a prospective cohort study. Clinical and pathology data were stored in a databank and the clinical protocol was unchanged during the study except for the amendment of additional indications of postoperative radiation in 1997. The assessment of tumor geography was based on pelvic examination at the time of tumor staging or radical hysterectomy or from the pathology report. Survival probabilities were calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method and compared with the log-rank test.
RESULTS: The mean age of the patients was 45 years and the mean follow-up duration 48 months. Tumors were of squamous cell type in 291 patients (73%). Lymph node metastases were present in 91 patients (24%) and postoperative radiation was given in 179 patients (45%). In 291 patients, tumor diameter was <4 cm; in 58 patients, the tumor was defined as bulky exophytic and in 51 patients as bulky barrel shaped. There were no differences among these three groups in terms of operating time, blood loss during surgery or complications at 3 or 6 months postoperatively. Bulky exophytic tumors had an identical overall survival as compared to small-diameter (<4 cm) tumors. The overall survival (OS) of bulky barrel-shaped tumors was significantly worse (P < 10(-4)). The same was found for disease-free survival (DFS).
CONCLUSION: Bulky exophytic cervical cancer has an identical surgical morbidity, overall and disease-free survival as compared to nonbulky (<4 cm) cervical cancer. In view of these identical characteristics, primary surgical treatment should be considered for patients with bulky exophytic cervical cancer.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15385113     DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2004.06.025

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gynecol Oncol        ISSN: 0090-8258            Impact factor:   5.482


  6 in total

1.  What is your diagnosis?

Authors:  Cemil Yaman; Dietmar Haas; Radec Chvatal; Peter Oppelt
Journal:  J Turk Ger Gynecol Assoc       Date:  2012-09-01

2.  Tumor growth patterns on magnetic resonance imaging and treatment outcomes in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer treated with definitive radiotherapy.

Authors:  Shintaro Tsuruoka; Masaaki Kataoka; Yasushi Hamamoto; Akifumi Tokumasu; Kotaro Uwatsu; Hiromitsu Kanzaki; Noriko Takata; Hirofumi Ishikawa; Ayaka Ouchi; Teruhito Mochizuki
Journal:  Int J Clin Oncol       Date:  2019-05-11       Impact factor: 3.402

3.  Perineural invasion in carcinoma of the cervix uteri--prognostic impact.

Authors:  Lars-Christian Horn; Alexandra Meinel; Uta Fischer; Karl Bilek; Bettina Hentschel
Journal:  J Cancer Res Clin Oncol       Date:  2010-02-19       Impact factor: 4.553

4.  Perineural invasion in early-stage cervical cancer and its relevance following surgery.

Authors:  Yi Zhu; Guonan Zhang; Yan Yang; Ling Cui; Shijun Jia; Yu Shi; Shuiqin Song; Shiqiang Xu
Journal:  Oncol Lett       Date:  2018-02-26       Impact factor: 2.967

Review 5.  Tumor Staging of Endocervical Adenocarcinoma: Recommendations From the International Society of Gynecological Pathologists.

Authors:  Kay J Park; Andres Roma; Naveena Singh; C Blake Gilks; Esther Oliva; Nadeem Abu-Rustum; Pedro T Ramirez; W Glenn McCluggage
Journal:  Int J Gynecol Pathol       Date:  2021-03-01       Impact factor: 3.326

6.  Loss of heterozygosity and copy number alterations in flow-sorted bulky cervical cancer.

Authors:  Sabrina A H M van den Tillaart; Wim E Corver; Dina Ruano Neto; Natalja T ter Haar; Jelle J Goeman; J Baptist M Z Trimbos; Gertjan J Fleuren; Jan Oosting
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-07-09       Impact factor: 3.240

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.