Jessica Hunn1, Meaghan E Tenney1, Ana I Tergas1, Erin A Bishop2, Kathleen Moore2, William Watkin3, Carolyn Kirschner4, Jean Hurteau4, Gustavo C Rodriguez4, Ernst Lengyel1, Nita K Lee1, S Diane Yamada5. 1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Section of Gynecologic Oncology, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA. 2. University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK, USA. 3. Department of Pathology, NorthShore University HealthSystem, Evanston, IL, USA. 4. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Gynecologic Oncology, NorthShore University HealthSystem, Evanston, IL, USA. 5. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Section of Gynecologic Oncology, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA. Electronic address: sdyamada@uchicago.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate surveillance methods and their utility in detecting recurrence of disease in a high grade endometrial cancer population. METHODS: We performed a multi-institutional retrospective chart review of women diagnosed with high grade endometrial cancer between the years 2000 and 2011. Surveillance data was abstracted and analyzed. Surveillance method leading to detection of recurrence was identified and compared by stage of disease and site of recurrence. RESULTS: Two hundred and fifty-four patients met the criteria for inclusion. Vaginal cytology was performed in the majority of early stage patients, but was utilized less in advanced stage patients. CA-125 and CT imaging were used more frequently in advanced stage patients compared to early stage. Thirty-six percent of patients experienced a recurrence and the majority of initial recurrences (76%) had a distant component. Modalities that detected cancer recurrences were: symptoms (56%), physical exam (18%), surveillance CT (15%), CA-125 (10%), and vaginal cytology (1%). All local recurrences were detected by symptoms or physical exam findings. While the majority of loco-regional and distant recurrences (68%) were detected by symptoms or physical exam, 28% were detected by surveillance CT scan or CA 125. One loco-regional recurrence was identified by vaginal cytology but no recurrences with a distant component detected by this modality. CONCLUSIONS: Symptoms and physical examination identify the majority of high grade endometrial cancer recurrences, while vaginal cytology is the least likely surveillance modality to identify a recurrence. The role of CT and CA-125 surveillance outside of a clinical trial needs to be further reviewed.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate surveillance methods and their utility in detecting recurrence of disease in a high grade endometrial cancer population. METHODS: We performed a multi-institutional retrospective chart review of women diagnosed with high grade endometrial cancer between the years 2000 and 2011. Surveillance data was abstracted and analyzed. Surveillance method leading to detection of recurrence was identified and compared by stage of disease and site of recurrence. RESULTS: Two hundred and fifty-four patients met the criteria for inclusion. Vaginal cytology was performed in the majority of early stage patients, but was utilized less in advanced stage patients. CA-125 and CT imaging were used more frequently in advanced stage patients compared to early stage. Thirty-six percent of patients experienced a recurrence and the majority of initial recurrences (76%) had a distant component. Modalities that detected cancer recurrences were: symptoms (56%), physical exam (18%), surveillance CT (15%), CA-125 (10%), and vaginal cytology (1%). All local recurrences were detected by symptoms or physical exam findings. While the majority of loco-regional and distant recurrences (68%) were detected by symptoms or physical exam, 28% were detected by surveillance CT scan or CA 125. One loco-regional recurrence was identified by vaginal cytology but no recurrences with a distant component detected by this modality. CONCLUSIONS: Symptoms and physical examination identify the majority of high grade endometrial cancer recurrences, while vaginal cytology is the least likely surveillance modality to identify a recurrence. The role of CT and CA-125 surveillance outside of a clinical trial needs to be further reviewed.
Authors: Mae Zakhour; Andrew J Li; Christine S Walsh; Ilana Cass; Beth Y Karlan; B J Rimel Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2013-09-17 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: P Morice; C Levy-Piedbois; S Ajaj; P Pautier; C Haie-Meder; C Lhomme; P Duvillard; D Castaigne Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2001-05 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Henry M Keys; James A Roberts; Virginia L Brunetto; Richard J Zaino; Nick M Spirtos; Jeffrey D Bloss; Andrew Pearlman; Mitchell A Maiman; Jeffrey G Bell Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2004-03 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Caroline C Billingsley; David E Cohn; David G Mutch; Erinn M Hade; Paul J Goodfellow Journal: Int J Gynecol Cancer Date: 2016-06 Impact factor: 3.437
Authors: Malcolm Strachan Ross; Chelsea Kilpatrick Chandler; Koji Matsuo; John Austin Vargo; Esther Elishaev; Nalyn Siripong; Jessica Layne Berger; Joseph Leo Kelley; Sarah Elizabeth Taylor Journal: Rare Tumors Date: 2019-11-07