Susan C Modesitt1, Bin Huang, Brent J Shelton, Stephen Wyatt. 1. Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Kentucky Chandler Medical Center, 800 Rose Street, Lexington, KY 40536-0298, USA. smode2@uky.edu
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The study objectives were to assess the effect of age, to evaluate the impact of smoking, and to determine the effect of rural residence on tumor characteristics, treatment modalities, and outcomes for Kentucky's endometrial cancer patients. METHODS: The Kentucky Cancer Registry identified Kentucky residents diagnosed with endometrial cancer from 1995 to 2002. Data abstracted included demographics, tumor characteristics, treatment, and recurrence/survival status. RESULTS: Three thousand five hundred and sixty-two women were diagnosed with endometrial cancer. Mean age at diagnosis decreased significantly (P=0.0388) over the 7-year period. Smokers had higher grade, stage, and worse outcomes. Rural women more often lacked commercial insurance, underwent less comprehensive surgical evaluation, and had less multimodality treatment. Increasing age (P<0.0001), positive or unknown smoking status (P=0.0003), black race (P<0.0001), no commercial insurance (P<0.0001), increasing grade or advanced stage (P<0.0001), small size of treating hospital (P<0.0001), and unknown nodal status (P<0.0001) were negatively associated with disease-specific survival. Lymph node sampling was performed in only 38.6% of women. On multivariate analysis, age (RR 1.38 for 10 year increments; P<0.0001), smoking (RR 1.38; P=0.008), no commercial insurance or Medicaid (RR 1.87; P=0.0007), rural residence (RR 0.77; P=0.011), advanced stage and grade (RR 7.96, 3.96; P<0.0001), and no nodal evaluation or unknown nodal status (RR 2.32, 2.51; P<0.0001) significantly effected disease-specific survival. CONCLUSIONS: Our data support a trend toward a younger age for endometrial cancer diagnosis, confirm the adverse impact of smoking and socioeconomic factors, and demonstrate an association between incomplete surgical staging and decreased survival.
INTRODUCTION: The study objectives were to assess the effect of age, to evaluate the impact of smoking, and to determine the effect of rural residence on tumor characteristics, treatment modalities, and outcomes for Kentucky's endometrial cancerpatients. METHODS: The Kentucky Cancer Registry identified Kentucky residents diagnosed with endometrial cancer from 1995 to 2002. Data abstracted included demographics, tumor characteristics, treatment, and recurrence/survival status. RESULTS: Three thousand five hundred and sixty-two women were diagnosed with endometrial cancer. Mean age at diagnosis decreased significantly (P=0.0388) over the 7-year period. Smokers had higher grade, stage, and worse outcomes. Rural women more often lacked commercial insurance, underwent less comprehensive surgical evaluation, and had less multimodality treatment. Increasing age (P<0.0001), positive or unknown smoking status (P=0.0003), black race (P<0.0001), no commercial insurance (P<0.0001), increasing grade or advanced stage (P<0.0001), small size of treating hospital (P<0.0001), and unknown nodal status (P<0.0001) were negatively associated with disease-specific survival. Lymph node sampling was performed in only 38.6% of women. On multivariate analysis, age (RR 1.38 for 10 year increments; P<0.0001), smoking (RR 1.38; P=0.008), no commercial insurance or Medicaid (RR 1.87; P=0.0007), rural residence (RR 0.77; P=0.011), advanced stage and grade (RR 7.96, 3.96; P<0.0001), and no nodal evaluation or unknown nodal status (RR 2.32, 2.51; P<0.0001) significantly effected disease-specific survival. CONCLUSIONS: Our data support a trend toward a younger age for endometrial cancer diagnosis, confirm the adverse impact of smoking and socioeconomic factors, and demonstrate an association between incomplete surgical staging and decreased survival.
Authors: Whitney E Zahnd; Katherine S Hyon; Paula Diaz-Sylvester; Sonya R Izadi; Graham A Colditz; Laurent Brard Journal: Cancer Causes Control Date: 2017-12-27 Impact factor: 2.506
Authors: Ashley Meilleur; S V Subramanian; Jesse J Plascak; James L Fisher; Electra D Paskett; Elizabeth B Lamont Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2013-10 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Graham W Warren; James R Marshall; K Michael Cummings; Michael A Zevon; Robert Reed; Pat Hysert; Martin C Mahoney; Andrew J Hyland; Chukwumere Nwogu; Todd Demmy; Elisabeth Dexter; Maureen Kelly; Richard J O'Connor; Teresa Houstin; Dana Jenkins; Pamela Germain; Anurag K Singh; Jennifer Epstein; Katharine A Dobson Amato; Mary E Reid Journal: Cancer Date: 2013-10-25 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Ashley S Felix; D Scott McMeekin; David Mutch; Joan L Walker; William T Creasman; David E Cohn; Shamshad Ali; Richard G Moore; Levi S Downs; Olga B Ioffe; Kay J Park; Mark E Sherman; Louise A Brinton Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2015-09-01 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Benjamin A Toll; Thomas H Brandon; Ellen R Gritz; Graham W Warren; Roy S Herbst Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2013-04-09 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Marian Symmes Johnson; Thomas C Tucker; Quan Chen; Bin Huang; Christopher P DeSimone; Rachel W Miller; Lauren A Baldwin; Tricia I Fredericks; Brian T Burgess; Frederick R Ueland Journal: South Med J Date: 2020-01 Impact factor: 0.954