| Literature DB >> 26537362 |
Yang Lv1, Ning Wang2, Yixiong Liu1, Xia Li1, Linni Fan1, Mingyang Li1, Lu Wang1, Zhou Yu1, Qingguo Yan1, Ying Guo1, Shuangping Guo1, Lichun Wei3, Mei Shi4, Zhe Wang5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To evaluate whether tumor invasion depth can be a reliable and easily applicable pathologic assessment strategy to predict outcomes using surgically resected cervical squamous cell carcinoma specimens from patients who have received neoadjuvant radiotherapy (RT) or concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT).Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26537362 PMCID: PMC4632273 DOI: 10.1186/s13000-015-0426-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Diagn Pathol ISSN: 1746-1596 Impact factor: 2.644
Fig. 1a Sketch illustrating the measurement method of tumor invasion depth (TID) at the cervical internal surface. b The red arrow indicates the measurement of the TID at the cervical internal surface in a representative specimen (magnification, ×40). c The yellow arrow indicates the measurement of TIDC at the cervical internal surface in a representative specimen with cytokeratin immunostaining correction (magnification, ×40)
The characteristics of 173 patients with FIGO stages Ib-IIIb cervical squamous cell carcinoma before and after the radical hysterectomy and results of correlation analyses
| Characteristic | Number of patients, n (%) | Median age, years (range) | Distant metastasis, n (%) |
| Recurrence, n (%) |
| The death events within 5 years, n (%) |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Treatments | CCRT | 125(72.3 %) | 45(25–65) | 12(9.6 %) | 0.579 | 4(3.2 %) | 0.697 | 7(5.6 %) | 0.512 |
| RT | 48(27.7 %) | 46(34–71) | 6(12.5 %) | 1(2.1 %) | 4(8.3 %) | ||||
| FIGO stage | Ib | 5(2.9 %) | 45(42–47) | 0 | 0.003 | 0 | 0.319 | 0 | <0.001 |
| IIa | 3(1.7 %) | 45(38–58) | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||||
| IIb | 150(86.7 %) | 45(27–71) | 13(8.7 %) | 4(2.7 %) | 5(3.3 %) | ||||
| IIIb | 15(8.7 %) | 48(25–65) | 5(33.3 %) | 1(6.7 %) | 6(40 %) | ||||
| yPathologic stage, | * | 84(48.6 %) | 45(27–65) | 3(3.6 %) | 0.001 | 1(1.2 %) | 0.150 | 1(1.2 %) | 0.003 |
| yI a1 | 24(13.9 %) | 42(35–52) | 2(8.3 %) | 0 | 1(4.2 %) | ||||
| yI a2 | 5(2.9 %) | 43(32–57) | 0 | 1(20 %) | 1(20 %) | ||||
| yI b2 | 61(35.2 %) | 46(25–71) | 13(21.3 %) | 3(4.9 %) | 8(13.1 %) | ||||
| WHO evaluation | CR | 83(48.0 %) | 45(27–65) | 3(3.6 %) | 0.007 | 1(1.2 %) | 0.206 | 1(1.2 %) | 0.010 |
| PR | 88(50.9 %) | 45(25–65) | 15(17.0 %) | 4(4.5 %) | 10(11.4 %) | ||||
| SD | 2(1.2 %) | 57(43–71) | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||||
| PD | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||||
| RECIST1.1 | CR | 83(48.0 %) | 45(27–65) | 3(3.6 %) | 0.005 | 1(1.2 %) | 0.224 | 1(1.2 %) | 0.007 |
| PR | 90(52.0 %) | 45(25–71) | 15(16.7 %) | 4(4.4 %) | 10(11.1 %) | ||||
| SD | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||||
| PD | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||||
| TNR | <90 % | 102(59.0 %) | 46(27–71) | 11(10.8 %) | 0.506 | 3(2.9 %) | 0.789 | 8(7.8 %) | 0.309 |
| >90 % | 71(41.0 %) | 45(25–65) | 7(9.9 %) | 2(2.8 %) | 3(4.2 %) | ||||
| TRG | TRG1 | 23(13.3 %) | 46(36–58) | 1(4.3 %) | 0.176 | 0 | 0.925 | 0 | 0.119 |
| TRG2 | 70(40.5 %) | 45(27–71) | 7(10 %) | 3(4.3 %) | 5(7.1 %) | ||||
| TRG3 | 44(25.4 %) | 44(25–65) | 4(9.1 %) | 1(2.3 %) | 1(2.3 %) | ||||
| TRG4 | 33(19.1 %) | 47(30–65) | 5(15.2 %) | 1(3.0 %) | 4(12.1 %) | ||||
| TRG5 | 3(1.7 %) | 45(39–45) | 1(33.3 %) | 0 | 1(33.3 %) | ||||
| Lymph node metastasis | yes | 20(11.6 %) | 46(37–65) | 7(35.0 %) | 0.000 | 3(15.0 %) | 0.001 | 3(15.0 %) | 0.093 |
| no | 153(88.4 %) | 45(25–71) | 11(7.2 %) | 2(1.3 %) | 8(5.2 %) |
Note: Post-operative pathologic FIGO stage *: FIGO staging no longer includes Stage 0 (Tis)
Fig. 2Association of overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) with the pre-operative clinical FIGO stage. a OS and b PFS curves show a slight difference with different pre-operative clinical FIGO staging prior to radical hysterectomy
Patient characteristics according to TID and TIDC cut-off values and results of correlation analyses
| Characteristic | Invasion depth (mm) | Number of patients, n (%) | Median age, years (range) | Distant metastasis, n (%) |
| Lymph node metastasis, n (%) |
| Recurrence (%) |
| The death events in 5 years, n (%) |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TID | <3.75 | 104 (60.1 %) | 45 (27–71) | 4 (3.8 %) | <0.001 | 12 (11.5 %) | 0.991 | 1 (1.0 %) | 0.064 | 1 (1.0 %) | <0.001 |
| >3.75 | 69 (39.9 %) | 46 (25–65) | 14 (20.2 %) | 8 (11.6 %) | 4 (5.8 %) | 10 (14.5 %) | |||||
| TIDC | <4.75 | 100 (57.8 %) | 45 (27–65) | 4 (4.0 %) | 0.001 | 12 (12.0 %) | 0.834 | 1 (1.0 %) | 0.083 | 1 (1.0 %) | 0.001 |
| >4.75 | 73 (42.2 %) | 46 (25–71) | 14 (19.2 %) | 8 (11.0 %) | 4 (5.5 %) | 10 (13.7 %) |
Fig. 3Association of overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) with the TID and TIDC at the cervical internal surface. a OS and b PFS curves show a clear difference between patient outcomes according to a TID cut-off value of 3.75 mm (TID <3.75 mm and TID ≥3.75 mm). c OS and d PFS curves show the prognostic significance of TIDC with the cut-off point of 4.75 mm (TIDC <4.75 mm and TIDC ≥4.75 mm)
Fig. 4Upon removing the data for patients with a pre-operative clinical FIGO stage of IIIb, a OS and b PFS curves continue to show the significant prognostic value of TID with a cut-off value of 3.75 mm. c OS and d PFS curves generated while excluding data for patients with stage IIIb carcinoma also continue to demonstrate the prognostic significance of the TIDC with a cut-off value of 4.75 mm