Literature DB >> 23528928

Impact of tumor size on survival in cancer of the cervix and validation of stage IIA1 and IIA2 subdivisions.

Aaron E Wagner1, Lisa Pappas, Amol J Ghia, David K Gaffney.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: A change has recently been made to the Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) staging system for cervical cancer to account for size within stage IIA cancers. This study was designed to investigate the impact of size within stage I-IIIB cervical carcinoma, and to validate these changes.
METHODS: The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program database was used to extract data on patients from 1988 to 2008. Patients were included who had information recorded regarding stage, size, and type of treatment received. They were then stratified by stage and size, and analyzed for cause-specific survival (CSS) using Kaplan Meier estimates, as well as hazard ratios using Cox proportional hazards regression modeling.
RESULTS: A total of 18,649 cases were evaluated. All stages evaluated demonstrated improved CSS on Kaplan Meier estimates for smaller tumor sizes (largest p=0.0003). Hazard ratios were significantly worse for larger tumor sizes on both univariate and multivariate modeling. Specifically, stage IIA cancers demonstrated a hazard ratio of 2.0 on univariate, and 1.69 on multivariate analysis (C.I. 1.46-2.75, p<0.0001 and C.I. 1.20-2.38, p=0.0025, respectively). Further size subdivisions of 2 and 4cm for stage I, 4cm for stage IIB, and 4 and 6cm for stage IIIB also maintained prognostic significance. On multivariate analysis within each stage, size was the only variable to maintain independent significance in all stages evaluated.
CONCLUSIONS: Size is independently prognostic within each stage in cervical cancer, validating the recent changes to the FIGO staging system.
Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23528928     DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2013.03.008

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


  28 in total

Review 1.  [The 2019 FIGO classification for cervical carcinoma-what's new?]

Authors:  L-C Horn; C E Brambs; S Opitz; U A Ulrich; A K Höhn
Journal:  Pathologe       Date:  2019-11       Impact factor: 1.011

2.  Prognostic Performance of the 2018 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics Cervical Cancer Staging Guidelines.

Authors:  Jason D Wright; Koji Matsuo; Yongmei Huang; Ana I Tergas; June Y Hou; Fady Khoury-Collado; Caryn M St Clair; Cande V Ananth; Alfred I Neugut; Dawn L Hershman
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2019-07       Impact factor: 7.661

3.  [Cervical cancer : Update on morphology].

Authors:  L-C Horn; C E Brambs; R Handzel; S Lax; I Sändig; D Schmidt; K Schierle
Journal:  Pathologe       Date:  2016-11       Impact factor: 1.011

4.  Texture Analysis of Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Maps in Cervical Carcinoma: Correlation with Histopathologic Findings and Prognosis.

Authors:  Ichiro Yamada; Noriko Oshima; Naoyuki Miyasaka; Kimio Wakana; Akira Wakabayashi; Junichiro Sakamoto; Yukihisa Saida; Ukihide Tateishi; Daisuke Kobayashi
Journal:  Radiol Imaging Cancer       Date:  2020-05-22

5.  What MRI-based tumor size measurement is best for predicting long-term survival in uterine cervical cancer?

Authors:  Njål Lura; Kari S Wagner-Larsen; David Forsse; Jone Trovik; Mari K Halle; Bjørn I Bertelsen; Øyvind Salvesen; Kathrine Woie; Camilla Krakstad; Ingfrid S Haldorsen
Journal:  Insights Imaging       Date:  2022-06-17

Review 6.  [Revised German guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of carcinoma of the uterine cervix-what's new for pathologists in 2021?]

Authors:  Lars-Christian Horn; Matthias W Beckmann; Markus Follmann; Martin C Koch; Monika Nothacker; Birgit Pöschel; Frederik Stübs; Dietmar Schmidt; Anne Kathrin Höhn
Journal:  Pathologie (Heidelb)       Date:  2022-02-21

7.  How to Select Early-Stage Cervical Cancer Patients Still Suitable for Laparoscopic Radical Hysterectomy: a Propensity-Matched Study.

Authors:  Luigi Pedone Anchora; Luigi Calrlo Turco; Nicolò Bizzarri; Vito Andrea Capozzi; Andrea Lombisani; Vito Chiantera; Francesca De Felice; Valerio Gallotta; Francesco Cosentino; Anna Fagotti; Gabriella Ferrandina; Giovanni Scambia
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2020-01-02       Impact factor: 5.344

8.  Evaluation of outcome and prognostic factors in 739 patients with uterine cervix carcinoma: a single institution experience.

Authors:  Fatma Teke; Adnan Yöney; Memik Teke; Gültekin Adanaş; Zuhat Urakçı; Gül Türkcü; Bekir Eren; Ali İnal; Mustafa Ünsal
Journal:  Contemp Oncol (Pozn)       Date:  2015-05-13

9.  Usefulness of the maximum standardized uptake value for the diagnosis and staging of patients with cervical cancer undergoing positron emission tomography/computed tomography.

Authors:  Hiroaki Takagi; Jinichi Sakamoto; Yasuhiro Osaka; Takeo Shibata; Satoko Fujita; Toshiyuki Sasagawa
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2018-02       Impact factor: 1.817

10.  Survival Outcomes in Patients With 2018 FIGO Stage IA2-IIA2 Cervical Cancer Treated With Laparoscopic Versus Open Radical Hysterectomy: A Propensity Score-Weighting Analysis.

Authors:  Wancheng Zhao; Yunyun Xiao; Wei Zhao; Qing Yang; Fangfang Bi
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2021-06-17       Impact factor: 6.244

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.