Literature DB >> 20531414

Outcomes after radical hysterectomy in patients with early-stage adenocarcinoma of uterine cervix.

J-Y Park1, D-Y Kim, J-H Kim, Y-M Kim, Y-T Kim, J-H Nam.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: To determine the prognostic factors and treatment outcomes of patients with early-stage adenocarcinoma (AdCa) of uterine cervix who underwent radical hysterectomy (RH).
METHODS: Patients with early-stage squamous cell carcinoma (SCCa) of the uterine cervix who underwent RH were compared with patients with AdCa by multivariate analysis.
RESULTS: A total of 1218 patients were eligible, of which 996 (81.8%) had SCCa and 222 (18.2%) had AdCa. In multivariate analysis, parametrial involvement and lymph node metastasis were significant factors for both recurrence-free survival(RFS) and overall survival (OS) of patients with AdCa, whereas age, tumour size, parametrial involvement and lymph node metastasis were significant factors for both RFS and OS of patients with SCCa. After adjusting for significant prognostic factors, patients with AdCa had significantly poorer RFS (odds ratio (OR)=2.07, 95% confidence interval (CI)=1.37-3.12, P=0.001) and OS (OR=2.56, 95% CI=1.65-3.96, P<0.001) than patients with SCCa. Recurrence outside the pelvis was more frequent in AdCa than in those with SCCa (75 vs 57.8%, P=0.084). CONCLUSION(S): Although RH is still acceptable for treatment of patients with AdCa, a more effective systemic adjuvant therapy is required.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20531414      PMCID: PMC2883705          DOI: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6605705

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Cancer        ISSN: 0007-0920            Impact factor:   7.640


Cervical cancer is the second most common female cancer and the third most common cause of cancer deaths in women worldwide (Parkin ; Waggoner, 2003). Approximately 75% of cervical cancers are squamous cell carcinomas (SCCas) and 15% are adenocarcinomas (AdCas), and the remainder consists of other rare histologic types (Kosary, 1994; Farley ). Recently, however, the relative proportion and the absolute incidence of AdCa, compared with SCCa, have increased (Smith ; Liu ; Sasieni and Adams, 2001). Nevertheless, there is no uniformly accepted form of management for AdCa. As with SCCa, patients with International Federation of Obstetrics and Gynecology (FIGO) stage IA2–IIA cervical AdCa are treated by radical hysterectomy (RH). The prognosis of patients with AdCa after RH is unclear, primarily because studies have been performed on small numbers of patients. Some of these studies found that patients with AdCa have poorer prognosis than do those with SCCa (Hopkins and Morley, 1991; Eifel ; Look ; Samlal ; Lai ; Kim ; Nakanishi ), whereas other reports found no differences in prognosis (Anton-Culver ; Miller ; Shingleton ; Grisaru ; Ayhan ; Lee ; Fregnani ; Kasamatsu ). Therefore, the prognosis after RH and the optimal management of AdCa are still a subject of debate. The aim of this study was to clarify the treatment outcomes and prognostic factors after RH in patients with FIGO stage IA2–IIA AdCa of uterine cervix, and to compare them with those of patients with SCCa to postulate the optimal management of patients with early-stage AdCa of uterine cervix.

Materials and methods

From 1989 to 2006, 2350 patients with invasive cervical cancer were treated and followed-up at the Asan Medical Center (AMC, Seoul, Korea). After approval by the Institutional Review Board of AMC, we searched the cancer registry and computerised database of AMC for patients with (1) FIGO stage IA2IIA cervical cancer, (2) who underwent RH with pelvic and/or para-aortic lymphadenectomy and (3) who had the histologic types of SCCa and AdCa. Patients who received chemotherapy, radiation therapy (RT) or concurrent chemoradiation therapy (CCRT) before RH, and patients with occult cervical cancer detected after simple hysterectomy, were excluded. As the preferred treatment in our centre for patients with FIGO stage IA2IIA cervical cancer is RH, almost all patients with FIGO stage IA2IIA cervical cancer underwent RH and only a small number of patients who were not eligible for radical surgery because of severe medical co-morbidity received RT or CCRT. Radical hysterectomy was completed in patients with positive pelvic or para-aortic lymph nodes or parametrial involvement confirmed by frozen section, although it is still unclear whether the surgeon should complete the RH or stop the procedure and administer CCRT if a frozen biopsy reveals parametrial involvement or lymph node metastasis. Patients with >2 intermediate risk factors (lymphovascular space invasion (LVSI), tumour >4 cm or deep cervical stromal invasion >2 out of 3) were recommended for adjuvant RT, whereas patients with one or more high-risk factors (resection margin involvement, parametrial involvement or lymph node involvement) were recommended for adjuvant CCRT. This policy for adjuvant therapy has been consistent during study periods. Medical records were retrospectively reviewed, and the following parameters were collected: age, FIGO stage, histology, grade of differentiation, tumour size, depth of cervical stromal invasion, parametrial involvement, resection margin status, lymphovascular space invasion, lymph node metastasis, adjuvant therapy, date of recurrence, location of recurrent disease, treatment at recurrence, and date of death or last follow-up. Pathologic slides were reviewed by two experienced pathologists at our institution. Squamous cell carcinomas were graded histologically as well-differentiated (grade 1; mature squamous cells with abundant keratin, pearl formation and sometimes intercellular bridges), moderately differentiated (grade 2; less abundant cytoplasm, cell borders less distinct, nuclei with greater pleomorphism and high mitotic activity) and poorly differentiated (grade 3; masses and nests of small, primitive-appearing oval cells with scant cytoplasm and hyperchromatic and spindle-shaped nuclei with high mitotic activity). All patients were followed-up at least every 3 months for the first 2 years, at least every 6 months for the next 3 years and then every year until recurrence or death. Recurrence-free survival (RFS) was defined as the time, in months, from the date of RH to the date of relapse or censoring, and overall survival (OS) was defined as the time, in months, from the date of RH to the date of death, last follow-up or censoring.

Statistical analysis

Frequency distributions were compared using the χ2 and Fisher's exact tests, and mean values were compared between groups using Student's t-test. The RFS and OS were estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method and groups were compared by the log-rank test for categorical factors and Cox's proportional hazards model for continuous factors, by univariate analysis. All prognostic variables found to be significant in univariate analysis were included in multivariate analysis using Cox's proportional hazards model. Stepwise backward elimination methods were used to select factors for inclusion in the multivariate Cox proportional hazards model (inclusion criteria, P<0.05; exclusion criteria, P>0.1). P-values <0.05 in two-sided tests were regarded as significant. Data analyses were performed using SPSS for Windows (version 11.0; SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). Power calculations were performed using NCSS software (version 2004; NCSS Inc., Kaysville, UT, USA). A two-sided log-rank test with an overall sample size of 1218 subjects (222 in group 1 and 996 in group 2) was calculated to achieve 92% power at a 0.05 significance level to detect a difference of 0.08 between 0.82 and 0.90, the proportions surviving in groups 1 and 2, respectively. This corresponded to a hazard ratio of 0.53. The proportion of patients lost during follow-up was 0.05. These results were based on the assumption that the hazard rates were proportional.

Results

During the study period, 1218 patients met all inclusion criteria. Of these, 996 patients (81.8%) had SCCa and 222 (18.2%) had AdCa. Of the 222 patients with AdCa, 203 had mucinous-type tumours, 14 had endometrioid-type tumours, 2 had serous-type tumours and 3 had mixed-type tumours. The characteristics of these patients are shown in Table 1. Patients with AdCa were significantly younger than those with SCCa. Lymphovascular space invasion was more frequent is patients with AdCa compared with those with SCCa. However, FIGO stage, grade of differentiation, tumour size, depth of cervical stromal invasion, parametrial involvement, resection margin status and lymph node metastasis did not differ between the two histologic groups.
Table 1

Characteristics of the study patients (n=1218)

   AdCa SCCa  
Characteristics Total (n=222) (n=996) P-value
Age, years     
 Mean (range)48.2 (24–86)46.4 (25–73)48.7 (24–86)0.006
 <3021 (1.7%)5 (2.3%)16 (1.6%)0.177
 30–49715 (58.7%)141 (63.5%)574 (57.6%) 
 >50482 (39.6%)76 (34.2%)406 (40.8%) 
     
FIGO stage     
 IA288 (7.2%)8 (3.6%)80 (8.0%)0.061
 IB1–IB21019 (83.7%)195 (87.8%)824 (82.7%) 
 IIA111 (9.1%)19 (8.6%)92 (9.3%) 
     
Histologic subtype
 Mucinous203 (16.7%)203 (16.7%)
 Endometrioid14 (1.1%)14 (1.1%) 
 Serou2 (0.2%)2 (0.2%) 
 Mixed3 (0.2%)3 (0.2%) 
     
Grade of differentiation
 Well332 (27.3%)63 (28.4%)269 (27.0%)0.366
 Moderately573 (47.0%)94 (42.3%)479 (48.1%) 
 Poorly294 (24.1%)60 (27.0%)234 (23.5%) 
 Undetermined19 (1.6%)5 (2.3%)14 (1.4%) 
     
Tumour size, cm     
 Mean (range)2.4 (0.3–9)2.3 (0.3–6)2.4 (0.4–9)0.286
 ⩽2571 (46.9%)108 (48.6%)463 (46.5%)0.147
 2–4510 (41.9%)94 (42.3%)416 (41.8%) 
 4–6114 (9.4%)20 (9.0%)94 (9.4%) 
 >623 (1.9%)0. (0.0%)23 (2.3%) 
     
Depth of stromal invasion
 ⩽1/2753 (61.8%)135 (60.8%)618 (62.0%)0.731
 >1/2465 (38.2%)87 (39.2%)378 (38.0%) 
     
Parametrial involvement
 No1106 (90.8%)200 (90.1%)906 (91.0%)0.684
 Yes112 (9.2%)22 (9.9%)90 (9.0%) 
     
Resection margin     
 Negative1190 (97.7%)218 (98.2%)972 (97.6%)0.585
 Positive28 (2.2%)4 (1.8%)24 (2.4%) 
     
LVSI     
 No969 (79.6%)189 (85.1%)780 (78.3%)0.023
 Yes249 (20.4%)33 (14.9%)216 (21.7%) 
     
Lymph node metastasis
 No1048 (86.0%)188 (84.7%)860 (86.3%)0.518
 Yes170 (14.0%)34 (15.3%)136 (13.7%) 
     
PALN metastasis a
 No1204 (98.9%)219 (98.6%)985 (98.9%)0.755
 Yes14 (1.1%)3 (1.4%)11 (1.1%) 
     
Adjuvant treatment
 None907 (74.5%)159 (71.6%)748 (75.1%)0.242
 Chemotherapy86 (7.1%)20 (9.0%)66 (6.6%) 
 Radiation therapy113 (9.3%)26 (11.7%)87 (8.7%) 
 CCRT112 (9.2%)17 (7.7%)95 (9.5%) 

Abbreviations: AdCa=adenocarcinoma; CCRT=concurrent chemoradiation therapy; FIGO=International Federation of Obstetrics and Gynecology; LVSI=lymphovascular space invasion; PALN=para-aortic lymph node; SCCa=squamous cell carcinoma.

A total of 731 patients underwent para-aortic lymphadenectomy.

Patients with FIGO stage IA2 disease (n=88) underwent type II hysterectomy with pelvic and/or para-aortic lymphadenectomy and patients with FIGO stage IB1–IIA disease (n=1130) underwent type III hysterectomy with pelvic and/or para-aortic lymphadenectomy. Thus, all patients underwent pelvic lymphadenectomy, and 731 underwent para-aortic lymphadenectomy. Of the 1218 patients, 311 (25.6%) received postoperative adjuvant therapy. There were no differences in the proportion of patients who received postoperative adjuvant therapy and in the type of adjuvant therapy between the two histologic groups (Table 1).

Survival and patterns of recurrence in patients with AdCa and SCCa

The overall median and mean follow-up times were 91 and 83 months (range, 10–236 months) for all patients, respectively, 73 and 81 months (range, 11–231 months), respectively, in patients with AdCa and 85 and 92 months (range, 10–236 months), respectively, in patients with SCCa (AdCa vs SCCa, P=0.012). Of the 1218 patients, 419 had follow-up durations of <60 months, with 137 lost to follow-up for over 1 year at the time of this analysis. Of these, 29 had AdCa and 108 had SCCa, making the rates of loss during follow-up 13.1% (29 out of 222) for the AdCa group, and 10.8% (108 out of 996) for the SCCa group (P=0.344). The mean and median follow-up times of patients lost to follow-up were 41 and 43 months (range, 14–59 months), respectively, for the AdCa group, and 43 and 41 months (range, 10–59 months), respectively, for the SCCa group (P=0.440). The 5-year and 10-year RFS rates in patients with AdCa were 86 and 82%, respectively, and the 5-year and 10-year RFS rates in patients with SCCa were 92 and 90%, respectively (P=0.009). The 5-year and 10-year OS rates in patients with AdCa were 90 and 83%, respectively, and the 5-year and 10-year OS rates in patients with SCCa were 94 and 91%, respectively (P<0.001). At the time of this analysis, 32 patients (14.4%) in AdCa group and 90 patients (9.0%) in SCCa group had cancer recurrence (P=0.016), and 30 patients (13.5%) in AdCa group and 71 patients (7.1%) in SCCa died of disease (P=0.002). The mean times to recurrence in the AdCa and SCCa groups were 36 months (range, 6–152 months) and 34 months (range, 2–156 months), respectively (P=0.805). The anatomic location of tumour at first recurrence was outside the pelvis in 57.8 and 75.0% of patients with SCCa and AdCa, respectively (P=0.084) (Table 2). Recurrent tumours in these patients were observed in the abdomen, skin, muscle, bone, liver, lung, meninx, brain and/or lymph nodes.
Table 2

The anatomic location of tumour at first recurrence by histologic type of tumour (N=122)

  Histologic type
  
Location of tumour SCCa AdCa Total   
Pelvis38 (42.2%)8 (25.0%)46 (37.7%)  
      
Outside pelvis 62 (67.8%)24 (75.0%)76 (62.3%)  
 Abdomena1 (1.1%)7 (21.9%)8 (6.6%)  
 Distant metastasisb42 (46.7%)11 (34.4%)53 (43.4%)  
 Pelvis and abdomen3 (3.3%)4 (12.5%)7 (5.7%)  
 Pelvis and distant metastasis3 (3.3%)2 (6.3%)5 (4.1%)  
 Abdomen and distant metastasis2 (2.2%)0 (0%)2 (1.6%)  
 Pelvis, abdomen and distant metastasis1 (1.1%)0 (0%)1 (0.8%)  
 Total90 (100.0%)32 (100.0%)122 (100.0%)  

Abbreviations: AdCa=adenocarcinoma; SCCa=squamous cell carcinoma.

Abdominal peritoneal metastasis.

Haematogenous metastasis to extraperitoneal organs.

The treatment modality or strategy was not altered over time. Therefore, we divided the study period arbitrarily into three 6-year intervals (1989–1994, n=156; 1995–2000, n=371; and 2001–2006, n=691). However, we found that 5-year disease-free survival rates (95, 92 and 90%, respectively, P=0.1425) and 5-year OS rates (97, 94 and 92%, respectively, P=0.1889) did not differ by time.

Prognostic factors associated with RFS and OS in patients with AdCa and SCCa

In 222 patients with AdCa, FIGO stage, tumour size, depth of cervical stromal invasion, parametrial involvement, resection margin status, LVSI, lymph node metastasis and type of adjuvant treatment were significantly associated with both RFS and OS in univariate analysis, whereas age, grade of differentiation and histologic subtype were unrelated (Table 3). After adjusting for factors significant in univariate analysis, multivariate analysis showed that parametrial involvement and lymph node metastasis were significant factors for both RFS and OS (Table 4).
Table 3

Univariate analyses of clinicopathologic parameters on recurrence-free and overall survival in patients with adenocarcinoma

  Adenocarcinoma (n=222)
   Recurrence-free survival
Overall survival
Variables N (%) 5-year rate (%) P-value 5-year rate (%) P-value
Age, years      
 As continuous variable222 (100) 0.153 0.073
 <305 (2.3)800.250800.096
 30–49141 (63.5)89 93 
 >5076 (34.2)81 86 
      
FIGO stage      
 IA28 (3.6%)100<0.001100<0.001
 IB1–IB2195 (87.8%)89 92 
 IIA19 (8.6%)52 65 
      
Histologic subtype
 Mucinous203 (16.7%)870.373900.425
 Endometrioid14 (1.1%)77 84 
 Serou2 (0.2%)50 50 
 Mixed3 (0.2%)100 100 
      
Grade of differentiation a
 Well63 (29.0)880.688900.532
 Moderately94 (43.3)83 91 
 Poorly60 (27.6)87 89 
      
Tumour size, cm      
 ⩽2108 (48.6)910.041950.033
 2–494 (42.3)82 85 
 4–620 (9.0)77 90 
 >60 (0.0)  
      
Depth of stromal invasion
 ⩽1/2135 (60.8)920.002940.008
 >1/287 (39.2)78 84 
      
Parametrial involvement
 No200 (90.1)89<0.00192<0.001
 Yes22 (9.9)55 66 
      
Resection margin
 Negative218 (98.2)870.013910.005
 Positive4 (1.8)38 38 
      
LVSI      
 No189 (85.1)880.033920.026
 Yes33 (14.9)75 80 
      
Lymph node metastasis
 No188 (84.7)90<0.00194<0.001
 Yes34 (15.3)66 69 
      
Adjuvant treatment
 None159 (71.6)890.00394<0.001
 Chemotherapy20 (9.0)88 95 
 Radiation therapy26 (11.7)76 77 
 CCRT11 (7.7)71 70 

Abbreviations: CCRT=concurrent chemoradiation therapy; FIGO=International Federation of Obstetrics and Gynecology; LVSI=lymphovascular space invasion.

Grade of differentiation was undetermined in 21 patients.

Table 4

Univariate analyses of clinicopathologic parameters on recurrence-free and overall survival in patients with squamous cell carcinoma

  Squamous cell carcinoma (n=996)
   Recurrence-free survival
Overall survival
Variables N 5-year rate (%) P-value 5-year rate (%) P-value
Age, years      
 As continuous variable996 (100) <0.001 <0.001
 <3016 (1.6)94<0.00194<0.001
 30–49574 (57.6)94 97 
 >50406 (40.8)88 91 
      
FIGO stage      
 IA280 (8.0)1000.0021000.061
 IB1–IB2824 (82.7)92 94 
 IIA92 (9.3)83 91 
      
Grade of differentiation a
 Well269 (27.4)920.705930.896
 Moderately479 (48.8)92 94 
 Poorly234 (23.8)90 93 
      
Tumour size, cm      
 ⩽2463 (46.5)97<0.00198<0.001
 2–4416 (41.8)89 92 
 4–694 (9.4)80 87 
 >623 (2.3)75 77 
      
Depth of stromal invasion
 ⩽1/2618 (62.0)94<0.001950.001
 >1/2378 (38.0)87 91 
      
Parametrial involvement
 No906 (91.0)93<0.00195<0.001
 Yes90 (9.0)78 82 
      
Resection margin
 Negative972 (97.6)920.399940.170
 Positive24 (2.4)96 100 
      
LVSI      
 No780 (78.3)93<0.001950.003
 Yes216 (21.7)87 90 
      
Lymph node metastasis
 No860 (86.3)93<0.00195<0.001
 Yes136 (13.7)82 85 
      
Adjuvant treatment
 None748 (75.1)94<0.00196<0.001
 Chemotherapy66 (6.6)89 91 
 Radiation therapy87 (8.7)84 87 
 CCRT95 (9.5)82 85 

Abbreviations: CCRT=concurrent chemoradiation therapy; FIGO=International Federation of Obstetrics and Gynecology; LVSI, lymphovascular space invasion.

Grade of differentiation was undetermined in 21 patients.

In 996 patients with SCCa, age, tumour size, depth of cervical stromal invasion, parametrial involvement, LVSI, lymph node metastasis and type of adjuvant treatment were significantly associated with both RFS and OS, but FIGO stage was significantly associated with only RFS in univariate analysis, whereas resection margin status and grade of differentiation were unrelated (Table 5). After adjusting for factors significant in univariate analysis, multivariate analysis showed that age, tumour size, parametrial involvement and lymph node metastasis were significant factors for both RFS and OS (Table 6).
Table 5

Multivariate analyses of clinicopathologic parameters on recurrence-free and overall survival in patients with adenocarcinoma

  Adenocarcinoma (n=222)
   Recurrence-free survivala
Overall survivala
Variables N OR (95% CI) P-value OR (95% CI) P-value
Parametrial involvement
 No200 (90.1)Reference Reference 
 Yes22 (9.9)3.46 (1.46–8.19)0.0056.17 (2.55–14.95)0.002
      
Lymph node metastasis
 No188 (84.7)Reference Reference 
 Yes34 (15.3)2.45 (1.14–5.30)0.0222.79 (1.25–6.25)0.012

Abbreviations: CI=confidence interval; LVSI=lymphovascular space invasion; OR=odds ratio.

The analysis included FIGO stage, tumour size, depth of stromal invasion, parametrial involvement, resection margin, LVSI, lymph node metastasis, and adjuvant treatment.

Table 6

Multivariate analyses of clinicopathologic parameters on recurrence-free and overall survival in patients with squamous cell carcinoma

  Squamous cell carcinoma (n=996)
   Recurrence-free survivala
Overall survivalb
Variables N OR (95% CI) P-value OR (95% CI) P-value
Age, years
 As continuous variable996 (100)1.05 (1.03–1.07)<0.0011.05 (1.03–1.07)<0.001
      
Tumour size, cm
 ⩽2463 (46.5)Reference Reference 
 2–4416 (41.8)2.25 (1.30–3.89)0.0042.12 (1.16–3.88)0.015
 4–694 (9.4)4.51 (2.32–8.78)<0.0013.51 (1.64–7.50)0.001
 >623 (2.3)6.36 (2.43–16.68)<0.0015.11 (1.73–15.14)0.003
      
Parametrial involvement
 No906 (91.0)Reference Reference 
 Yes90 (9.0)1.78 (1.01–3.12)0.0462.17 (1.13–4.13)0.019
      
Lymph node metastasis
 No860 (86.3)Reference Reference 
 Yes136 (13.7)1.86 (1.12–3.09)0.0172.11 (1.18–3.75)0.012

Abbreviations: CI=confidence interval; LVSI=lymphovascular space invasion; OR=odds ratio.

The analysis included age, FIGO stage, tumour size, depth of stromal invasion, parametrial involvement, LVSI, lymph node metastasis and adjuvant treatment.

The analysis included age, tumour size, depth of stromal invasion, parametrial involvement, LVSI, lymph node metastasis and adjuvant treatment.

When analysing 1218 patients with AdCa and SCCa, age, FIGO stage, histologic type, tumour size, depth of cervical stromal invasion, parametrial involvement, LVSI, lymph node metastasis and type of adjuvant treatment were significantly associated with both RFS and OS, whereas resection margin status and grade of differentiation were unrelated (Table 7). After adjusting for factors significant in univariate analysis, multivariate analysis showed that age, histologhic type, tumour size, parametrial involvement and lymph node metastasis were significant factors for both RFS and OS (Table 8). Relative to patients with SCCa, the probability of cancer recurrence was significantly higher in patients with AdCa (odds ratio (OR)=2.07, 95% confidence interval (CI)=1.37–3.12, P=0.001) after adjusting factors significant in univariate analysis. Moreover, the probability of cancer death was significantly higher in patients with AdCa (OR=2.56, 95% CI=1.65–3.96, P<0.001) compared with patients with SCCa after adjusting factors significant in univariate analysis.
Table 7

Univariate analyses of clinicopathologic parameters on recurrence-free and overall survival in all patients (n=1218)

   Recurrence-free survival
Overall survival
Variables No. of patients 5-year rate (%) P-value 5-year rate (%) P-value
Age, years      
 As continuous variable1218 (100%) <0.001 <0.001
 <3021 (1.7%)90<0.00190<0.001
 30–49715 (58.7%)93 96 
 >50482 (39.6%)87 90 
      
FIGO stage      
 IA288 (7.2%)100<0.001100<0.001
 IB1–IB21019 (83.7%)91 93 
 IIA111 (9.1%)80 86 
      
Histology      
 SCCa996 (81.8%)920.00894<0.001
 AdCa222 (18.2%)86 90 
      
Grade of differentiation a
 Well332 (27.3%)910.902930.967
 Moderately573 (47.0%)91 94 
 Poorly294 (24.1%)89 92 
      
Tumour size, cm      
 ⩽2571 (46.9%)96<0.00197<0.001
 2–4510 (41.9%)88 91 
 4–6114 (9.4%)80 87 
 > 623 (1.9%)75 77 
      
Depth of stromal invasion
 ⩽1 out of 2753 (61.8%)94<0.00195<0.001
 >1 out of 2465 (38.2%)85 90 
      
Parametrial involvement
 No1106 (90.8%)92<0.00195<0.001
 Yes112 (9.2%)74 79 
      
Resection margin
 Negative1190 (97.7%)910.911930.803
 Positive28 (2.2%)89 93 
      
LVSI      
 No1048 (86.0%)92<0.00194<0.001
 Yes170 (14.0%)85 89 
      
Lymph node metastasis
 No1111 (85.5%)93<0.00195<0.001
 Yes188 (14.5%)78 82 
      
Adjuvant treatment
 None907 (74.5%)93<0.00195<0.001
 Chemotherapy86 (7.1%)89 92 
 Radiation therapy113 (9.3%)82 85 
 CCRT112 (9.2%)80 83 

Abbreviations: AdCa=adenocarcinoma; CCRT=concurrent chemoradiation therapy; FIGO=International Federation of Obstetrics and Gynecology; LVSI=lymphovascular space invasion; SCCa=squamous cell carcinoma.

Grade of differentiation was undetermined in 21 patients.

Table 8

Multivariate analyses of clinicopathologic parameters on recurrence-free and overall survival in all patients (n=1218)

   Recurrence-free survivala
Overall survivala
Variables No. of patients OR (95% CI) P-value OR (95% CI) P-value
Age, years
 As continuous variable1218 (100%)1.04 (1.03–1.06)<0.0011.05 (1.03–1.06)<0.001
      
Histology      
 SCCa996 (81.8%)Reference Reference 
 AdCa222 (18.2%)2.07 (1.37–3.12)0.0012.56 (1.65–3.96)<0.001
      
Tumour size, cm
 ⩽2571 (46.9%)Reference Reference 
 2–4510 (41.9%)2.11 (1.34–3.31)0.0012.06 (1.27–3.37)0.004
 4–6114 (9.4%)3.55 (2.00–6.31)<0.0013.02 (1.59–5.72)0.001
 >623 (1.9%)5.48 (2.17–13.81)<0.0014.60 (1.64–12.93)0.004
      
Parametrial involvement
 No1106 (90.8%)Reference Reference 
 Yes112 (9.2%)2.04 (1.27–3.29)0.0032.15 (1.25–3.70)0.005
      
Lymph node metastasis
 No1111 (85.5%)Reference Reference 
 Yes188 (14.5%)2.07 (1.35–3.18)0.0012.27 (1.41–3.64)0.001

Abbreviations: AdCa, adenocarcinoma; CI, confidence interval; OR, odds ratio; LVSI=lymphovascular space invasion; SCCa, squamous cell carcinoma;

The analysis included age, FIGO stage, histology, tumour size, depth of stromal invasion, parametrial involvement, resection margin, LVSI, lymph node metastasis and adjuvant treatment.

Discussion

In our series, the survival outcomes after RH followed by tailored adjuvant therapy according to postoperative risk factors in patients with IA2–IIA AdCa of uterine cervix were excellent because 5-year RFS and OS were 86 and 90%, respectively. Parametrial involvement and lymph node metastasis were independent prognostic factors in patients with AdCa as were they in patients with SCCa. Therefore, this treatment strategy for IA2–IIA AdCa of uterine cervix seems acceptable as with SCCa. However, in spite of the distribution of postoperative risk factors, the proportion of patients who received adjuvant therapy, and type of adjuvant therapy were not different between AdCa and SCCa groups, the RFS and OS were significantly poorer in AdCa group compared with SCCa group in multivariate analysis although the survival differences were not much. The time interval to recurrence was not different between AdCa and SCCa groups, but recurrence outside pelvis was more frequent in AdCa groups. This may suggest that AdCa has somewhat aggressive behaviour with propensity of distant metastasis and systemic adjuvant therapy might be beneficial for AdCa. It has long been unclear whether prognosis of patients with early-stage cervical cancer undergoing RH was dependent on histologic type. Although some studies included a significant number of subjects, most previous reports had small cohorts of patients, with numbers insufficient to determine small differences in RFS and OS. Hence, because the survival of surgically treated patients with early-stage cervical cancer is excellent, the magnitude of differences in RFS and OS among different histologic types is small. Previous studies have reported that the magnitude of differences in 5-year RFS and OS rates ranged from 2.0 to 9.0%, findings similar to ours (Look ; Lai ; Nakanishi ; Ayhan ; Fregnani ). As far as we know, our series is one of the largest studies which compared the survival outcomes of early-stage AdCa and SCCa. The survival difference between AdCa and SCCa groups was small but significant. In our series, a two-sided log-rank test with an overall sample size of 1218 subjects (of which 222 are in AdCa group and 996 are in SCCa group) achieved 80% power at a 0.05 significance level to detect a difference of 6% in 10-year DFS between 86 and 92%, the proportions surviving in AdCa group and SCCa group, respectively. A two-sided log-rank test with an overall sample size of 1218 subjects (of which 222 are in AdCa group and 996 are in SCCa group) achieved 92% power at a 0.05 significance level to detect a difference of 8% in 10-year OS between 82 and 90%, the proportions surviving in AdCa group and SCCa group, respectively. Although we found that patients with AdCa had significantly poorer prognosis than those with SCCa, after adjusting for other significant prognostic factors, the magnitude of differences in RFS and OS were small and the RFS and OS of patients with AdCa and AdSCCa were still good. Therefore, the current management strategy for patients with early-stage AdCa, consisting of RH followed tailored adjuvant therapy according to postoperative risk factors, should be acceptable. Of the 20 patients with AdCas 4–6 cm in diameter, 4 had recurrent disease and 3 of these died of disease within 5 years, making the 5-year DFS and OS rates 77 and 90%, respectively. The fourth patient with recurrence died of disease at 78 months, making the survival rate at 78 months 80%, similar to the 40–70% OS rates previously reported. It is still not clear whether histologic type has an effect on time to recurrence after RH, or on the patterns of spread and recurrence. Although several studies reported that the time to recurrence was shorter in patients with AdCa and AdSCCa than in those with SCCa, more recent work has found no difference associated with histologic type (Look ; Lai ). When classified into recurrence inside and outside the pelvis, the pattern of spread and recurrence did not differ among histologic groups in some studies (Look ; Lai ; Grisaru ), whereas other reports showed an association between histologic type and more frequent disseminated peritoneal spread or distant metastasis (Drescher ; Eifel ; Kasamatsu ). In our series, recurrence outside the pelvis was more frequent in patients with AdCa. As a result of the absence of curative systemic therapy, patients with recurrence outside the pelvis tend to perform very poorly; however, patients with isolated pelvic recurrence are frequently salvaged with pelvic RT with or without concurrent chemotherapy. This may be one reason for the differences in OS observed among histologic types. Therefore, to improve the survival of patients with AdCa after RH, more effective systemic adjuvant therapies are required. Consistently reported independent adverse prognostic factors for patients with early-stage cervical cancer after RH include higher FIGO stage, lymph node metastasis, parametrial involvement, depth of cervical stromal invasion, tumour size and LVSI (Look ; Lai ; Kasamatsu ). We also found that these factors were significant in univariate analysis, although only lymph node metastasis, parametrial involvement and tumour size were significant in multivariate analysis. Some investigators reported that AdCa was more frequently associated with these prognostic factors than SCCa (Kasamatsu ). However, other studies found no significant association between these factors and histologic type (Shingleton ; Look ; Nakanishi ; Fregnani ). In our series, there were no differences in FIGO stage, tumour size, depth of cervical stromal invasion, parametrial involvement, LVSI or lymph node metastasis between patients with the two histologic types. In conclusion, we found that the clinicopathologic characteristics and time interval to recurrence did not differ between histologic types. However, recurrence outside the pelvis was more frequent in patients with AdCa than in those with SCCa. Moreover, patients with AdCa had significantly poorer RFS and OS than did those with SCCa. Nevertheless, the current treatment strategy of RH on patients with AdCa is acceptable because the RFS and OS were still excellent. However, more effective systemic adjuvant therapies after RH are needed for patients with AdCa.
  24 in total

1.  Cervical cancer: the increasing incidence of adenocarcinoma and adenosquamous carcinoma in younger women.

Authors:  S Liu; R Semenciw; Y Mao
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2001-04-17       Impact factor: 8.262

2.  Are adenocarcinomas and adenosquamous carcinomas different from squamous carcinomas in stage IB and II cervical cancer patients undergoing primary radical surgery?

Authors:  C.-H. Lai; S. Hsueh; J.-H. Hong; T.-C. Chang; C.-J. Tseng; H.-H. Chou; K.-G. Huang; J.-D. Lin
Journal:  Int J Gynecol Cancer       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 3.437

3.  What is the difference between squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma of the cervix? A matched case-control study.

Authors:  K Bm Lee; J M Lee; C Y Park; K B Lee; H Y Cho; S Y Ha
Journal:  Int J Gynecol Cancer       Date:  2006 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 3.437

Review 4.  Adenosquamous histology predicts a poor outcome for patients with advanced-stage, but not early-stage, cervical carcinoma.

Authors:  John H Farley; Kimberly W Hickey; Jay W Carlson; G Scott Rose; Edward R Kost; Terry A Harrison
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2003-05-01       Impact factor: 6.860

5.  An analysis of cell type in patients with surgically staged stage IB carcinoma of the cervix: a Gynecologic Oncology Group study.

Authors:  K Y Look; V L Brunetto; D L Clarke-Pearson; H E Averette; F J Major; R D Alvarez; H D Homesley; R J Zaino
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  1996-12       Impact factor: 5.482

6.  A comparison of prognoses of FIGO stage IB adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma.

Authors:  A Ayhan; R A Al; C Baykal; E Demirtas; K Yüce; A Ayhan
Journal:  Int J Gynecol Cancer       Date:  2004 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 3.437

7.  Role of human papillomavirus genotype in prognosis of early-stage cervical cancer undergoing primary surgery.

Authors:  Chyong-Huey Lai; Chee-Jen Chang; Huei-Jean Huang; Swei Hsueh; Angel Chao; Jung-Erh Yang; Cheng-Tao Lin; Shang-Lang Huang; Ji-Hong Hong; Hung-Hsueh Chou; Tzu-I Wu; Kuan-Gen Huang; Chun-Chieh Wang; Ting-Chang Chang
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2007-08-20       Impact factor: 44.544

8.  Is there really a difference in survival of women with squamous cell carcinoma, adenocarcinoma, and adenosquamous cell carcinoma of the cervix?

Authors:  H M Shingleton; M C Bell; A Fremgen; J S Chmiel; A H Russell; W B Jones; D P Winchester; R E Clive
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1995-11-15       Impact factor: 6.860

Review 9.  FIGO stage, histology, histologic grade, age and race as prognostic factors in determining survival for cancers of the female gynecological system: an analysis of 1973-87 SEER cases of cancers of the endometrium, cervix, ovary, vulva, and vagina.

Authors:  C L Kosary
Journal:  Semin Surg Oncol       Date:  1994 Jan-Feb

10.  Radical hysterectomy for FIGO stage I-IIB adenocarcinoma of the uterine cervix.

Authors:  T Kasamatsu; T Onda; M Sawada; T Kato; S Ikeda; Y Sasajima; H Tsuda
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2009-05-05       Impact factor: 7.640

View more
  27 in total

1.  Increased expression of iASPP correlates with poor prognosis in FIGO IA2-IIA cervical adenocarcinoma following a curative resection.

Authors:  Fanming Kong; Xiaofeng Shi; Huzi Li; Pu Li; Jianchun Yu; XiaoJiang Li; Jun Chen; Yiyu Sun; Yingjie Jia
Journal:  Am J Cancer Res       Date:  2015-02-15       Impact factor: 6.166

2.  Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with docetaxel and carboplatin followed by radical hysterectomy for stage IB2, IIA2, and IIB patients with non-squamous cell carcinoma of the uterine cervix.

Authors:  Muneaki Shimada; Shoji Nagao; Keiichi Fujiwara; Nobuhiro Takeshima; Ken Takizawa; Tadahiro Shoji; Toru Sugiyama; Satoshi Yamaguchi; Ryuichiro Nishimura; Junzo Kigawa
Journal:  Int J Clin Oncol       Date:  2016-07-05       Impact factor: 3.402

3.  Comparison of clinical outcomes of squamous cell carcinoma, adenocarcinoma, and adenosquamous carcinoma of the uterine cervix after definitive radiotherapy: a population-based analysis.

Authors:  Juan Zhou; San-Gang Wu; Jia-Yuan Sun; Feng-Yan Li; Huan-Xin Lin; Qiong-Hua Chen; Zhen-Yu He
Journal:  J Cancer Res Clin Oncol       Date:  2016-09-19       Impact factor: 4.553

Review 4.  Adenocarcinoma of the cervix: should we treat it differently?

Authors:  Ned L Williams; Theresa L Werner; Elke A Jarboe; David K Gaffney
Journal:  Curr Oncol Rep       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 5.075

5.  Cytoplasmic Maspin Expression Correlates with Poor Prognosis of Patients with Adenocarcinoma of the Uterine Cervix.

Authors:  Kanae Nosaka; Yasushi Horie; Tatsushi Shiomi; Hiroaki Itamochi; Tetsuro Oishi; Muneaki Shimada; Shinya Sato; Tomohiko Sakabe; Tasuku Harada; Yoshihisa Umekita
Journal:  Yonago Acta Med       Date:  2015-12-18       Impact factor: 1.641

6.  Comparison of outcomes between squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma in patients with surgically treated stage I-II cervical cancer.

Authors:  Makoto Yamauchi; Takeshi Fukuda; Takuma Wada; Masaru Kawanishi; Kenji Imai; Yasunori Hashiguchi; Tomoyuki Ichimura; Tomoyo Yasui; Toshiyuki Sumi
Journal:  Mol Clin Oncol       Date:  2014-05-15

7.  Oncogenic mutations in cervical cancer: genomic differences between adenocarcinomas and squamous cell carcinomas of the cervix.

Authors:  Alexi A Wright; Brooke E Howitt; Andrea P Myers; Suzanne E Dahlberg; Emanuele Palescandolo; Paul Van Hummelen; Laura E MacConaill; Melina Shoni; Nikhil Wagle; Robert T Jones; Charles M Quick; Anna Laury; Ingrid T Katz; William C Hahn; Ursula A Matulonis; Michelle S Hirsch
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2013-08-23       Impact factor: 6.860

8.  FoxP3(+) and IL-17(+) cells are correlated with improved prognosis in cervical adenocarcinoma.

Authors:  Simone Punt; Marjolein E van Vliet; Vivian M Spaans; Cornelis D de Kroon; Gert Jan Fleuren; Arko Gorter; Ekaterina S Jordanova
Journal:  Cancer Immunol Immunother       Date:  2015-03-21       Impact factor: 6.968

9.  Multivariate prognostic analysis of adenocarcinoma of the uterine cervix treated with radical hysterectomy and systematic lymphadenectomy.

Authors:  Tatsuya Kato; Hidemichi Watari; Mahito Takeda; Masayoshi Hosaka; Takashi Mitamura; Noriko Kobayashi; Satoko Sudo; Masanori Kaneuchi; Masataka Kudo; Noriaki Sakuragi
Journal:  J Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2013-07-04       Impact factor: 4.401

10.  Comparison of the outcome between cervical adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma patients with adjuvant radiotherapy following radical surgery: SGSG/TGCU Intergroup Surveillance.

Authors:  Muneaki Shimada; Ryuichiro Nishimura; Takamitsu Nogawa; Masayuki Hatae; Kazuhiro Takehara; Hidekazu Yamada; Hirohisa Kurachi; Yoshihito Yokoyama; Toru Sugiyama; Junzo Kigawa
Journal:  Mol Clin Oncol       Date:  2013-05-09
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.