OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to assess effects of clinicopathologic risk factors and contemporary therapeutic interventions on high-risk uterine epithelial carcinoma outcomes. METHODS: Patient-, disease-, and treatment-specific variables were annotated. Survival was estimated via the Kaplan-Meier method. Associations were evaluated with Cox proportional hazard regression and summarized using hazard ratios. RESULTS: From 1999 through 2008, therapy with curative intent was initiated for 119 grade 3 endometrioid (G3EC), 211 serous (USC), and 40 clear cell (CCC) carcinomas. Although clinicopathologic risk factors varied among the histologic subtypes, overall survival (OS) did not differ statistically between subtypes (P=.10) or in stage-for-stage comparative analyses (stage I/II, P=.45; stage III, P=.46; stage IV, P=.65). The 5-year cause-specific survival in stage I/II was 84.8%, 89.8%, and 83.9% for G3EC, USC, and CCC, respectively; multivariable modeling identified lymphovascular space involvement (LVSI) as the only independent prognostic factor (P=.02). For stage III, 5-year OS was 49.2% and 40.0% for G3EC and USC, respectively; multivariable modeling identified age (P<.001), LVSI (P<.001), unresectable nodal disease (P=.03), and regional radiotherapy (P=.01) as independent prognostic factors. For stage IV, 5-year OS was 8.7% and 12.1% for G3EC and USC, respectively; multivariable modeling identified LVSI (P=.002), cervical stromal invasion (P=.02), and adjuvant chemotherapy (P=.02) but not residual disease as independent prognostic factors. CONCLUSIONS: When controlled for disease stage, outcomes did not differ among high-risk histologic subtypes. LVSI was a significant adverse prognostic factor within all stages. The lack of improved outcomes with contemporary therapy suggests that more innovative therapeutic approaches should be given higher priority.
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to assess effects of clinicopathologic risk factors and contemporary therapeutic interventions on high-risk uterine epithelial carcinoma outcomes. METHODS:Patient-, disease-, and treatment-specific variables were annotated. Survival was estimated via the Kaplan-Meier method. Associations were evaluated with Cox proportional hazard regression and summarized using hazard ratios. RESULTS: From 1999 through 2008, therapy with curative intent was initiated for 119 grade 3 endometrioid (G3EC), 211 serous (USC), and 40 clear cell (CCC) carcinomas. Although clinicopathologic risk factors varied among the histologic subtypes, overall survival (OS) did not differ statistically between subtypes (P=.10) or in stage-for-stage comparative analyses (stage I/II, P=.45; stage III, P=.46; stage IV, P=.65). The 5-year cause-specific survival in stage I/II was 84.8%, 89.8%, and 83.9% for G3EC, USC, and CCC, respectively; multivariable modeling identified lymphovascular space involvement (LVSI) as the only independent prognostic factor (P=.02). For stage III, 5-year OS was 49.2% and 40.0% for G3EC and USC, respectively; multivariable modeling identified age (P<.001), LVSI (P<.001), unresectable nodal disease (P=.03), and regional radiotherapy (P=.01) as independent prognostic factors. For stage IV, 5-year OS was 8.7% and 12.1% for G3EC and USC, respectively; multivariable modeling identified LVSI (P=.002), cervical stromal invasion (P=.02), and adjuvant chemotherapy (P=.02) but not residual disease as independent prognostic factors. CONCLUSIONS: When controlled for disease stage, outcomes did not differ among high-risk histologic subtypes. LVSI was a significant adverse prognostic factor within all stages. The lack of improved outcomes with contemporary therapy suggests that more innovative therapeutic approaches should be given higher priority.
Authors: Jessica Hunn; Meaghan E Tenney; Ana I Tergas; Erin A Bishop; Kathleen Moore; William Watkin; Carolyn Kirschner; Jean Hurteau; Gustavo C Rodriguez; Ernst Lengyel; Nita K Lee; S Diane Yamada Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2015-03-30 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Joyce N Barlin; Robert A Soslow; Megan Lutz; Qin C Zhou; Caryn M St Clair; Mario M Leitao; Alexia Iasonos; Martee L Hensley; Richard R Barakat; Xavier Matias-Guiu; Nadeem R Abu-Rustum Journal: Int J Gynecol Cancer Date: 2013-11 Impact factor: 3.437
Authors: Yu-Ping Liu; Jiahu Wang; Victoria A Avanzato; Jamie N Bakkum-Gamez; Stephen J Russell; John C Bell; Kah-Whye Peng Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2014-01-14 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Jamie N Bakkum-Gamez; Andrea Mariani; Sean C Dowdy; Amy L Weaver; Michaela E McGree; Janice R Martin; Gary L Keeney; Aminah Jatoi; Bobbie S Gostout; Karl C Podratz Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2014-01-14 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Giorgio Bogani; Sean C Dowdy; William A Cliby; Fabio Ghezzi; Diego Rossetti; Andrea Mariani Journal: J Obstet Gynaecol Res Date: 2014-02 Impact factor: 1.730
Authors: Lora H Ellenson; Britta Weigelt; Robert A Soslow; Amir Momeni-Boroujeni; Wissam Dahoud; Chad M Vanderbilt; Sarah Chiang; Rajmohan Murali; Eric V Rios-Doria; Kaled M Alektiar; Carol Aghajanian; Nadeem R Abu-Rustum; Marc Ladanyi Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2021-02-18 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Harriet Belding Eldredge-Hindy; Gary Eastwick; Pramila Rani Anne; Norman G Rosenblum; Russell J Schilder; Raffi Chalian; Allison M Zibelli; Christine H Kim; Robert Den Journal: J Contemp Brachytherapy Date: 2014-09-05