Literature DB >> 24633893

Pathologic prognostic factors in stage I-III uterine carcinosarcoma treated with postoperative radiotherapy.

Angeles Rovirosa1, Carlos Ascaso, Meritxell Arenas, Ivan Ríos, Marta Del Pino, Jaume Ordi, Javier Morales, Marina Gascón, Jaume Pahisa, Albert Biete.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To analyse the impact of prognostic factors on specific overall survival (SOS) after postoperative radiotherapy (P-RT) in carcinosarcomas.
METHODS: We retrospectively analysed 81 patients who received P-RT from 1977 to 2010 after the diagnosis of carcinosarcomas. 2009 FIGO stage: 25-IA, 20-IB, 6-II, 9-IIIA, 11-IIIC. Age, stage, vascular and lymphatic space invasion (VLSI), myometrial invasion, grade, mitotic index, sarcomatous/epithelial components, tumour size and necrosis were considered for the analysis. STATISTICS: we used the Kaplan-Meier method for survival analysis and the Cox model for risk factor evaluation.
RESULTS: The mean follow-up of the series was 78.86 months (range 7-381). The median age was 72 years (range 51-89). 30 out 81 (37 %) patients relapsed and died (22.2 % pelvic and abdominal, 13.5 % exclusive distant metastasis). On univariate and multivariate analysis only stage had a significant impact on SOS. At 5 years, stage I-II had a SOS of 66 % in comparison with stage III with 30 %.
CONCLUSIONS: Two groups of patients showing different outcome were found after P-RT in uterine carcinosarcomas: stage I-II patients had a life expectancy 2.5-fold longer compared to stage III patients. New therapeutic strategies are warranted in carcinosarcomas considering the high incidence of distant metastasis.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24633893     DOI: 10.1007/s00404-014-3202-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Gynecol Obstet        ISSN: 0932-0067            Impact factor:   2.344


  5 in total

1.  Survival of Patients with Uterine Carcinosarcoma Undergoing Sentinel Lymph Node Mapping.

Authors:  Maria B Schiavone; Oliver Zivanovic; Qin Zhou; Mario M Leitao; Douglas A Levine; Robert A Soslow; Kaled M Alektiar; Vicky Makker; Alexia Iasonos; Nadeem R Abu-Rustum
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2015-05-21       Impact factor: 5.344

Review 2.  Review of Recommended Treatment of Uterine Carcinosarcoma.

Authors:  Joseph Menczer
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Oncol       Date:  2015-11

3.  Is minimally invasive surgery for clinical stage I uterine carcinosarcoma safe?

Authors:  Risha Sinha; Aaron Nizam; Weiwei Shan; Karin K Shih; Marina Frimer; Antoinette Sakaris; Gary L Goldberg
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2021-10-30

4.  Unenhanced region on magnetic resonance imaging represents tumor progression in uterine carcinosarcoma.

Authors:  Ayami Inoue; Ken Yamaguchi; Yasuhisa Kurata; Ryusuke Murakami; Kaoru Abiko; Junzo Hamanishi; Eiji Kondoh; Tsukasa Baba; Aki Kido; Ikuo Konishi; Noriomi Matsumura
Journal:  J Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2017-06-01       Impact factor: 4.401

5.  Uterine carcinosarcoma: A 10-year single institution experience.

Authors:  Leana Terblanche; Matthys H Botha
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-07-21       Impact factor: 3.752

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.