Literature DB >> 20922138

Survival benefit of laparoscopic surgical staging-guided radiation therapy in locally advanced cervical cancer.

Dae Gy Hong1, Nae Yoon Park, Gun Oh Chong, Young Lae Cho, Il Soo Park, Yoon Soon Lee.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: This study was designed to evaluate the survival benefit of laparoscopic surgical staging (LSS)-guided tailored radiation therapy (RT) in locally advanced cervical cancer (LACC).
METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 89 LACC patients' medical records who primarily received non-surgical treatment, of which pretreatment LSS was performed in 20 (LSS group) and primary chemoradiation therapy (CCRT) without LSS (CCRT group) was carried out in 69 from January 2000 to January 2006. We analyzed clinical characteristics, pretreatment imaging study results and survival outcomes including disease free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) to compare them between the two groups.
RESULTS: There were as many as eight cases (40%) of LSS related complications. The mean time interval between LSS and RT or CCRT was 26.6 days (±18.8 days). Six out of twenty (30%) in LSS group and 10 out of 69 (14.5%) in CCRT group received extended field RT when paraaortic lymph nodes (LNs) were positive based on the pathologic findings after LSS and the results of imaging studies, respectively. Three-year DFS and OS were both better in 33 imaging-negative CCRT group patients than those in 4 imaging-negative/pathology-positive (false negative) patients after LSS (3-year DFS, 50% vs. 87%, p=0.022; 3-year OS, 50% vs. 84%, p=0.033). The 5-year DFS rates were 52% and 55% in LSS group and in CCRT group, respectively (p=0.28). The 5-year OS rates were 68% in LSS group and 62% in CCRT group without significant difference between the two groups (p=0.79).
CONCLUSION: We found that LSS-based RT tailoring did not show survival benefit in LACC despite inaccuracy of imaging-based RT tailoring. Further studies are required to find new method to overcome this inaccuracy and improve survival outcomes.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cervical carcinoma; Chemoradiation; Laparoscopy; Surgical staging

Year:  2010        PMID: 20922138      PMCID: PMC2948223          DOI: 10.3802/jgo.2010.21.3.163

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Gynecol Oncol        ISSN: 2005-0380            Impact factor:   4.401


  24 in total

1.  Laparoscopic staging compared with imaging techniques in the staging of advanced cervical cancer.

Authors:  Hermann Hertel; Christhardt Köhler; Tarek Elhawary; Wolfgang Michels; Marc Possover; Achim Schneider
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 5.482

Review 2.  Which role for pre-treatment laparoscopic staging?

Authors:  Anna Fagotti; Francesco Fanfani; Romina Longo; Francesco Legge; Alessandra Mari; Maria L Gagliardi; Giovanni Scambia
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2007-08-28       Impact factor: 5.482

3.  FDG-PET for management of cervical and ovarian cancer.

Authors:  Laura J Havrilesky; Shalini L Kulasingam; David B Matchar; Evan R Myers
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 5.482

4.  Invasive cervical carcinoma: comparison of MR imaging and surgical findings.

Authors:  H Hricak; C G Lacey; L G Sandles; Y C Chang; M L Winkler; J L Stern
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1988-03       Impact factor: 11.105

5.  The effect of treatment duration in the local control of cervix cancer.

Authors:  B Jones; R Kingston; J Green; E Adams; C Bleasdale
Journal:  Radiother Oncol       Date:  1993-08       Impact factor: 6.280

6.  Is there a benefit of pretreatment laparoscopic transperitoneal surgical staging in patients with advanced cervical cancer?

Authors:  Simone Marnitz; Christhardt Köhler; Christina Roth; Jürgen Füller; Wolfgang Hinkelbein; Achim Schneider
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2005-08-29       Impact factor: 5.482

7.  Laparoscopic staging in locally advanced cervical carcinoma: A new possible philosophy?

Authors:  J Vidaurreta; A Bermúdez; G di Paola; J Sardi
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  1999-12       Impact factor: 5.482

8.  Prospective evaluation of surgical staging of advanced cervical cancer via a laparoscopic extraperitoneal approach.

Authors:  Y Sonoda; E Leblanc; D Querleu; B Castelain; T H Papageorgiou; E Lambaudie; F Narducci
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2003-11       Impact factor: 5.482

9.  Treatment planning guidelines regarding the use of CT/PET-guided IMRT for cervical carcinoma with positive paraaortic lymph nodes.

Authors:  Jacqueline Esthappan; Sasa Mutic; Robert S Malyapa; Perry W Grigsby; Imran Zoberi; Farrokh Dehdashti; Tom R Miller; Walter R Bosch; Daniel A Low
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2004-03-15       Impact factor: 7.038

10.  Randomized trial of surgical staging (extraperitoneal or laparoscopic) versus clinical staging in locally advanced cervical cancer.

Authors:  Chyong-Huey Lai; Kuan-Gen Huang; Ji-Hong Hong; Chyi-Long Lee; Hung-Hsueh Chou; Ting-Chang Chang; Swei Hsueh; Huei-Jean Huang; Koon-Kwan Ng; Chieh-Sheng Tsai
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2003-04       Impact factor: 5.482

View more
  2 in total

1.  [Substantial advantage of CT-planned HDR brachytherapy for cervical cancer patients compared to a historical series with regard to local control and toxicity?]

Authors:  Simone Marnitz
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2017-03       Impact factor: 3.621

2.  Cost-effectiveness of para-aortic lymphadenectomy before chemoradiotherapy in locally advanced cervical cancer.

Authors:  Jung Yun Lee; Younhee Kim; Tae Jin Lee; Yong Woo Jeon; Kidong Kim; Hyun Hoon Chung; Hak Jae Kim; Sang Min Park; Jae Weon Kim
Journal:  J Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2015-04-17       Impact factor: 4.401

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.